Transcript of private session: Women’s Forum

Tuesday, 18 May 2004
10.30 am

The names of those present at this session and any references in the transcript that could lead to identification of individuals or third parties have been removed.

Sir William Morris: Well, good morning everyone. Can I first of all say welcome to the Morris Inquiry's Women's Forum? Right at the outset, I want to record that my colleagues and myself are delighted to see so many women officers and members of staff from the Met here this morning. We are looking forward to learning your views on a number of very important issues.

But first, some introductions. I am Sir Bill Morris, recently retired General Secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union, and I chair the Inquiry. As you can see, there are two other members of the panel: on my right is Sir Anthony Burden, who recently retired as Chief Constable of the South Wales Constabulary, after a very long and distinguished career in the police service. On my left is Miss Anesta Weekes QC; Anesta sits as a recorder and part-time chairperson of employment tribunals, and she was in fact counsel to the Lawrence Inquiry.

As you know, we have been asked by the Metropolitan Police Authority to conduct an independent inquiry into professional standards and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service.

In our task, we have received a lot of evidence over the past few months, and some of it suggests that the MPS is not always sensitive in the way it manages its female officers and staff. That is why we wanted to get together a group of female staff and officers, so that we can hear direct what women in the Met have to say about their experience.

Today will be relatively informal, and will enable us to have a conversation about the issues which concern women in the Metropolitan Police Service.

We have therefore asked Operation Oakley, the Metropolitan Police Federation, the Met trade unions and indeed the Metropolitan Black Police Officers Association to arrange your attendance here today, and let me, right at this point, record our gratitude for their co-operation, and indeed their assistance.

As you can see from the notes on your seats, we want to hear from you on a whole range of issues, but I would like to emphasise that we are not just interested in what is wrong with the Met, we are equally interested in what is right with it, and we are particularly keen to hear your suggestions as to how to make things better.

Although we are a public inquiry, we have decided to conduct this hearing in private, the reason being that we want you to feel comfortable, to answer our questions, to tell us what you think, and indeed to do so without an audience from the Met, or from the media, or indeed anyone else.

I hope you find these arrangements helpful, and that you feel confident to speak freely with us this morning. However, as I have said, we are a public inquiry, and we are obliged to operate in as open and transparent a way as possible. As a result, we will be publishing the transcript of this morning's session on our website in the next few days, but we will only do so after we have taken all steps to remove any reference to your names or other personal details, in order to be sure that it contains no information that identifies any individuals.

Before I begin, I want to say a word about how I intend to conduct this morning's session. I want to listen, I want to learn, and I want to hear your experience. And so we hope this event will be a more conversational format, a discussion rather than questions and answers.

As I have already said, we want it to be informal, and in essence, to have that two-way conversation, and this is a hope that my colleagues and I both share.

To help this process, as you will see, we have circulated a list of topics for discussion, on which we want your views. I will chair the discussion, and lead on one or two of the earlier topics as listed. The remainder will be divided between Miss Weekes and Sir Anthony.

Despite the list, we do genuinely want to feel that you have had every opportunity in telling us anything which is relevant to your work that will help us in our task, which is to conduct this public inquiry.

Two members of our support team will be available with a roving microphone, so that we can hear, and everyone can hear, what is being said. We would therefore be very grateful if you would wait to begin your contribution until one of the members of our support team reaches you with the microphone, at which point giving your name and identifying your areas of work would indeed be helpful.

If you are an officer, your name and rank and title would also be extremely helpful. But I repeat again, any identification by name or areas of work which might identify you through rank will be removed before we post on our website the areas that we discuss this morning.

So at this point, I think that it would be appropriate if I just pause and see whether there are any comments on the way that I have just outlined that we want to conduct this session this morning. Feel free to comment, say whatever you wish, and, if you do raise any points, then I promise it will be properly and constructively considered. (Pause).

Okay, it seems that we are all content so far. Let me just say again, if you do not want to give your name, then we are comfortable; if you do, then at least we can have a conversation, rather than me just pointing and saying "sister", I can use a name which, for me, is more personal.

Could I just say to you that we have received a lot of evidence over the last 12 weeks or so, on a whole range of issues. We have talked about some of the work/life balance issues, the diversity issues, the Fairness at Work issues. But I think that what we want to hear is what you see, as women in the Metropolitan Police Service, officers and staff, what you see as the big issues for you that would make a difference to your working life, if we can sort of just start there.

If you had one thing that would make a real difference to the quality of your working life, what would that be? I see a hand at the back.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] officer at [Redacted]. My main thing is being part-time; if I could be taken a bit more seriously than I am, it would be quite pleasant. It is quite a big issue really. I am not taken seriously by anybody at work. All my colleagues – when I go into work, they say, "Are you still part-time?", every single time I go into work, I am absolutely sick of it. And my senior management as well, I find it really difficult.

I have tried to do flexible working, it has taken ten months to get my shift pattern sorted out, which I think is totally unacceptable. It has been very difficult, they have pushed me, they have batted me from pillar to post, they have put me on various different teams, to try and sort of, effectively, get rid of me, that is what it felt like, and eventually, ten months later, when I asked for a written reason why they were turning it down, they said they were not turning it down, they lost the file, and they finally came up with a shift pattern, but it took them ten months, which is not acceptable.

Sir William Morris: I am assuming you have got caring responsibilities?

Speaker: I have a [Redacted] year old and a [Redacted} year old. I work part-time, [Redacted] hours a week, and I share childcare with my husband who also works shifts. He is a [Redacted], so it is quite difficult to have two shift patterns, so that is why I have tried to do a flexible working pattern where I work the same days every week, but I do long days. It has been very difficult, and it still is very difficult, and I am just sick to the back teeth of it, to be honest with you.

Sir William Morris: We have heard in our fieldwork of the police service in other parts of the country where there is a designated person, with the title of "childcare co-ordinator", and that person has the responsibility to try and do a matching up between operational needs and caring needs.

It is reasonably formal within that particular service, but from what we have heard and listened to so far, it would appear that there is no sort of formal arrangement or reference point to help and assist.

Speaker: The human resources department have been very helpful to me, but the problem I have found is that my management have absolutely no idea whatsoever what the policies are, not a clue, and nobody at the [Redacted] does. I am [Redacted]. I have had trouble ever since I have been there, because they do not know about pregnancy policies, maternity leave, things like that, they have not got a clue.

Sir William Morris: Can I just ask whether that is a common experience? Yes, I am seeing a few nods. Can you just put your hand up if it is a common experience? Right, fairly common, I would say, about 10 per cent, there or thereabouts.

But one of the words which underpin the concerns you have just expressed about the lack of sort of action is communication; it appears that the policies, whilst they exist, are not effectively communicated to the understanding of those who might need to access those policies.

Can I just explore the difficulties around internal communication of policies within the Met? I know they have technology, there is the intranet, there are bulletins, and a whole raft of methods in communication, but, on the critical issue of policies which affect the individuals, officers and staff, could someone sort of just give us some commentary on that?

Speaker: Sir, I actually work in [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in [Redacted], and I am also on the [Redacted]. When I was pregnant, it was like I suddenly worked for a whole entire new organisation, which was really scary. I know the policies, [Redacted] [Redacted], but I could not get it through to my line manager, which was the [Redacted] manager, the way I should be being dealt with, and how I should work, and my request to come back and work part-time – we have got clear policies on all those areas, I had to fight for everything.

Two weeks before I went off on maternity leave, she told me that she thought the hours I wanted to work when I came back would not be suitable. I worked right up until my eighth month, and I had to fight to get a risk assessment done, it was not done properly, and in the end, I went and found myself an office on a lower floor, because I was climbing up 70 stairs every day to get to work.

I work in [Redacted], and when I phoned up and spoke to central personnel policy, I spoke to a manager about what she wanted to do about my return to work, my hours, and they asked me what the name of the [Redacted] manager was; when I told them, he said, "Oh, she is a friend of mine", so you feel like there is no one there that you can ask.

You need someone centrally, someone perhaps in management centrally, in personnel, human resources, that you can actually go to and get these problems aired and clarified, because at the moment, we have got a childcare co-ordinator, but she is very new in the post, and it is unique to women, and it is the one time that you are very vulnerable – you might wonder why I did not complain about the manager; that was the same manager who would have to agree my childcare times, and, like the previous lady, I am sharing childcare with my husband who works shifts, so it is very specific. I have to work those specific times to make it work for us.

So it is very scary, you are very vulnerable, and there is no one central to go to, and I think in an organisation of our size, it should not be impossible for there to be somebody there.

Sir William Morris: Thank you. Anyone else on this whole question of communication policy and practice?

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in the [Redacted]. I also work part-time, and have done so since I had my [Redacted], who is now [Redacted], and I have also found that there has been a complete change in attitude to a part-time worker in my department, and you are treated differently from a full-time worker.

There are policies in place for people with caring responsibilities, but it is up – the unit which you work in has the option of adopting those policies or not, depending on their requirements. So you may have some units which are more progressive than others.

I cannot say that I have found my unit to be particularly progressive, although there has been some introduction recently of flexible working hours, but there are other issues that they have not addressed, things like term-time working, which they do have in other areas, I know they have that in the Crown Prosecution Service; that has not been introduced. They do not have – they are very much against home working, although that was introduced for a very short time, but then was withdrawn.

And a lot of policies which are sort of family friendly, which the Met as an organisation would say they are in favour of, the particular unit is not in favour of.

Sir William Morris: Okay, thank you very much indeed.

Speaker: I am [Redacted] from the [Redacted] . From my point of view, I am a manager, and where I found issues with the policies is where I have had to manage police officers. I am police staff, and I have had to manage police officers.

You get automatically that undermining of your responsibilities as a manager, where police officers will say to you, "You do not understand the policies", even though it is quite clearly written out, and you can answer questions.

Also, you can see it from the other viewpoint as well, where you have had police officers who are managers of police staff, who then just do not understand the policies at all, especially policies regarding part-time working, working from home.

I have worked in an IT department, and we have got all of the technology that you could possibly have, with all the security implications and everything else, but the thought of working from home is just an absolute no-no. They will not even consider it. They just get paranoid regarding the security issues and things like that.

But all you are doing working from home is maybe just dealing with annual reports, and things like that, you are not logging into the system in any shape or form.

I think the policies themselves are just so open to personal interpretation, and that is where it all goes wrong, because each department says to themselves, "Well, we cannot implement them", and they are not always held accountable as to why they are not going to implement a particular policy.

A number of years back, I wanted to work part-time – I foster, and that brings in a whole new ball game, because I am not physically giving birth to a child, then they all feel I should not have the same part-time rights and everything else, but I had to show them and prove to them that I am actually entitled to the same viewpoint as everybody else, and with the help 13 of a very good personnel manager, they told me, "Your department has to tell you why you cannot work part-time, not the other way round", so I did not have to prove it, they had to come back to me.

But I had to be quite bullish about it all, in order to go through it, otherwise it would have been a case of, "Well, the organisation said no, so, no, you cannot do it", and I would have turned round and said to social services, "Well, actually I cannot do it".

Sir William Morris: Anybody else on this question of communication? I see one.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] from [Redacted]. My main problem again is the fact that the senior staff at [Redacted] borough just seem to have no idea of the actual policies in place. I know many people in the organisation, they are usually detectives or police officers, who have had the same problem, and, because I have seen their fight, time and time again, I am now almost nervous to ask to go part-time.

I am currently working full-time, and another [Redacted] in [Redacted] borough has been told there is no place for a part-time [Redacted] at [Redacted], so I know I am going to have a fight on my hands to go part-time, I have a Redacted] year old and an [Redacted] old with [Redacted], and I would very much like to do that. I know it is going to be a massive fight.

The other problem we have is, if I am working 8.00-4.00 at the moment in the office, at any time during the day an arrest can come in and we would be expected to deal with the prisoner, which can take many hours. If an arrest comes in at 3.45, then I or another member of staff will have to deal with that prisoner and, of course, if I have to go home and look after the children, it is very difficult to find childcare at such short notice, and I could not have to deal with a prisoner for three weeks, and then suddenly, I could have to deal with one every single day, and there is no rhyme nor reason as to when that is going to happen, but there is nothing in place to allow me or anybody else to go home for childcare reasons if it does happen.

Sir William Morris: There is a lady right at the very back.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted] with [Redacted]. [Redacted] and one of the things they have really pushed for [Redacted] – especially females, is to be able to work term time. It has arisen a few times, and there has been only one occasion where they have allowed that PCSO to work term time. Most boroughs have actually said that they are not geared up for it, but they are pushing it for PCSOs.

When I got on to HR central policy, they referred me to a site on the intranet. It has got one line, "Some people may require to work term time". Where is the information there? It does not help anybody.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], from the [Redacted] . Some of the issues we have with regards to policies, especially for junior members of staff, is that they are not actually aware of any policies. They know that, you know, we are following them in the guidelines and things like that, but actually accessing it, a lot of them do not know how to do it. Catering staff, a lot of them do not have access to the intranet, therefore they do not know anything about the organisation, much less about their policies.

So when we actually speak to a lot of junior members of staff, we have to say, "Well, do you know that you are entitled to this? This is what this policy says", and they have no clue whatsoever.

Then what managers do is that they blind them with knowledge, so what they will do is talk about a policy, and again, it will be their interpretation of what that policy is, and being a junior member of staff, you just take their word for it; you know, you just do not question, you do – there is a lot of staff that will take it as given, and therefore it will not be challenged. If you are challenged, then that is a different ball game altogether.

Even as a first line manager, I have had that problem again. I mean, I am on maternity leave at the moment, so I am just wondering about this part-time now, listening to all of these other ladies, but I am in a position whereby, you know, I have not really got a job at the moment, because I just said that I am not going back to where I originally came from, because I was having so many problems there.

Again, it is about how managers use that policy, because not only do they misinterpret it, they use it to harm people, and I do not say that loosely either, you know, we are talking about people's lives, people's careers, you know, how they progress, and it is all of that. It all goes down to, you know, how managers want to use policies, and the lack of knowledge from members of staff, and how to interpret it and how to access it as well.

Sir William Morris: Thank you.

Speaker: I am [Redacted] working in [Redacted] borough. Some time ago, I did part-time for a while, I have [Redacted] children, [Redacted] and [Redacted] now, but initially, I found there was a division regarding what department I was working in.

When I worked with the [Redacted] department, the [Redacted] squad, there was actually no leeway at all for childcare, so much so that I ended up leaving that particular department, and asked to go back to [Redacted].

Since going to [Redacted], I was then able to go part-time, and then sort things out. I was very fortunate that I had a line manager who understood the problems, the fact that he had a child who had problems, so he needed extra time himself, so he was very sympathetic to my situation. [Redacted].

Then I found – I had his backing, and my other supervisor's backing, but later on, when I applied for a driving course, being part-time, then that ugly situation raised its head; the opposition that I had regarding having the driving course whilst part-time was amazing, and I really had to assert myself in order to go through it, and the pressure on the course was amazing, because I knew I had to get through it first time.

So I mean, now things are a hell of a lot better; I am a [Redacted], and I am able to now look after any officers who want to go part-time, I am very much trying to get myself in the position to know the policies. But without someone being sympathetic – and I mean, everyone has generally had an uphill battle.

Sir William Morris: I will take another two contributions on this, and then move on, because I think the pattern is fairly well established in terms of the gap between the policy, the communication and – I will take this lady in the front here.

Speaker: I am [Redacted], a [Redacted]. I have a lot of members who are part-time who complain that team meetings seem to be scheduled on days they are off, the minutes are not comprehensive enough for them to know what has gone on, management do not give feedback on their return to work, as to what has happened.

And the other issue, a lot of staff who do not work in (inaudible) buildings base, sometimes there are not enough terminals – there are not enough e-mail terminals. Sometimes there will be one terminal and 30 staff, and those staff are expected to trawl through these long and detailed policies, sort of 15 minutes during their parade time, along with all their other colleagues.

So sometimes, there is not the technology available, these staff are working out of the building from the time – after parade, they are straight out, they do not come back until the end of the day.

Sir William Morris: Thanks very much.

Speaker: [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] borough. I experienced problems when I had my [Redacted] child, and wanted to go part-time, and also wanted to breast feed my child when I came back. That was seen as a major problem, and I was told that I was not allowed to breast feed after my baby was three months old.

It ended up going to an industrial tribunal, and the policy – there is no policy which states that I cannot breast feed the baby. I also tried to find out exactly what duties I was able to carry out whilst breast feeding, whether I was allowed to come into contact with CS Gas, wear body armour, things like that. I never got any answers for that, and I have had two other women on my borough also wanting to breast feed their children who have also encountered the same problems.

Sir William Morris: Thank you. Well, as I have indicated, there are a lot of common strands in respect of the whole question of part-time, and people with caring responsibilities, so I think we have got a fair picture there.

I just want to move on with one more issue before I invite my colleagues to come in. One of the issues which emerged in our evidence so far, it is a question of the culture, the culture can manifest itself in many ways, but for the purpose of this exercise, it is a sort of gender issue.

The best way I can describe the culture, as it has been conveyed to us, is a sort of lads' and dads' culture, the boys' culture, and, from that point of view, the female officers and staff find it difficult to get a hearing in a very constructive way, because the expectation is that things are done this way, it has always been done this way, and if you have the sort of responsibilities that we have just been discussing, it is just bad luck for you, and it is not accommodating to the overall context of the gender requirement.

Is that an unfair portrayal of the culture, or at least part of the culture, as you see it, or is that just somebody else's view or prejudice, from a gender perspective?

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in [Redacted], and I echo my colleague's thoughts earlier on; there are very few women in [Redacted], and it is very easy to become quite isolated. It is all the rules around communication as well, because I think, as communication has developed, in terms of technology, senior managers have become more remote from their staff and from the issues that affect their staff.

In relation to the culture, my perception over the years is that female officers are really just in the "difficult" tray, and that, if you are a strong officer, or if you know where you want to go, or what you want to do, then you are bossy. Whereas, if you are a male, you would be a good, strong leader. I think that is still quite evident; that is my perception.

Sir William Morris: Anybody else?

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] on the [Redacted] in the [Redacted]. You may or may not be aware that 50 per cent of our staff are women, so we are one of the OCUs that actually has a lot of part-time female workers.

I would say that, as a manager on a team, it is a strategic problem for myself, because we are not given an augmentation of staff to cope with the fact that, because we have 50 per cent women, we have restricted duties, maternity and part-time working as issues to deal with, when we are trying to investigate a serious crime [Redacted].

So from my perspective, it is a strategic issue that particularly those OCUs that attract women, like [Redacted] and perhaps the DPS, they are not given the support of an augmentation of staffing levels.

Sir William Morris: I take your point.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted] from the [Redacted and my main area is around [Redacted], but in the previous part of my career, for [Redacted] years, I served on the [Redacted] and I would say, in any department that I have ever been aware of, there is a lads' and dads' culture there, and there is a certain amount of assimilation that has to take place in order to survive that environment.

Childcare issues – I have moved on from there since then, and it is a good ten years since then, but I would hazard a guess that things have not improved as much as they could do, particularly in an area like that. It also relates to – in terms of the physical nature of the job; if you are a mother, you are breast feeding, shield training is not going to help you, it is not going to be very helpful. Already a female officer on the [Redacted] has lost her life because of inappropriate equipment.

So I would say probably one of those areas that seriously needs a focus is an area like that, where you are particularly proactive; there is an indentured lads' and dads' – or a lads' culture.

Sir William Morris: First of all, the management must be aware of this, this sort of culture, the lads' and dads' culture. What can be done to break it down? Or is it so pervasive that it cannot be broken down?

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], and I am from [Redacted] at the moment. I must say, with the childcare issues, we have [Redacted] WPCs, if I can call them that, who have gone part-time, and, as far as I am aware, talking in the locker room, they have got 100 per cent backing from [Redacted] senior management. They have come forward with working timetables which fit in with their partners, who are also on the [Redacted]. I believe it does have some respect to do with the fact that senior management want to progress, so they want to take that role on, and prove that they can leave [Redacted], having brought in the female flexibility system with childcare issues.

Like my colleague said behind me, there is still very much a lads' and dads' environment, and if you are not a strong person, a strong character and a strong female officer of any kind, then you will not survive there.

I think every day you go to work, you know you are going and it is going to be a battle – not, I think, from a chauvinistic side, I do not think the males within the [Redacted] appreciate what you feel as a female officer. It is naivety, and the one way we all describe it, as females on the [Redacted], is we would like to put one male officer in a carrier full of eight WPCs and see how they feel, see if they feel intimidated, see if they feel some of the conversations that go on, you know, some of the times you feel excluded, how that approach is.

I think sometimes, if that was to happen, they would back off and they would realise – I think it is just naivety on their behalf.

Sir William Morris: I will take a point in the front here, and then hand over to Miss Weekes.

Speaker: Can I just make one point, in the interests of fairness, which I think is very important here? My name is [Redacted], I am from the [Redacted] in [Redacted]. You have obviously asked this question before in your Inquiry; this is just a point of fairness, I have worked in three forces now, including the [Redacted], the Met being my third and final force, and I have worked in [Redacted] departments for a long time now.

I have obviously been very, very lucky, and I have not encountered some of the things that the other ladies are talking about here. I have not seen that either, and I would just like the Inquiry to take note that, in the interests of fairness, that is not what is going on 100 per cent.

I do not dispute anything that is going on. I would just like that point made with the Inquiry, because I think it is very important, and it is a very easy accusation to point at the police force, that there is a lads' and dads' culture and, having recently come from the [Redacted], as other officers here have come from, that is one that is perceived to be very much male orientated, and I am sure there are other women in this room that could probably support me and say when you actually get there, the story is very, very different.

Sir William Morris: Fair point, but we have heard quite a bit of evidence on the lads' and dads' – that is why we have returned to it, looking for the fairness and the balance, but I take your point.

Speaker: I am [Redacted], based at the [Redacted] , I am also an active [Redacted]. Within the [Redacted], I am one of [Redacted] females, and I am the only black female out of [Redacted] officers.

We currently assist [Redacted], and last year, they have certain accommodations where you can either be there – with regards to, like, say, refreshments, as an example, you will have full board. At a particular accommodation based in [Redacted], it is only for males. They have, for example, [Redacted] accommodations, and a lot of officers go up to assist at [Redacted] because they get an allowance or they get a cheque, in advance, which can work out to be quite a lot of money over a six-week to eight-week period, whereas, as a female, I am not given that opportunity.

Another example is we had one female motorcyclist in [Redacted], all the guys had their locker rooms downstairs in the basement, where all the bikes are; she was the only female out of [Redacted] officers, and her locker room was up on the third floor. Many was the time I have had to give her a hand to get all her things taken downstairs, her helmet and all her biker's gear. She has spoken a million times about getting lockers, and it still has not been done.

Now she has left [Redacted], she has gone to [Redacted]. She had a better career offer, plus I think she got fed up with some of the issues that are currently on [Redacted].

Not on all the branches – you know, the MPS, that, you know, you say about "lads and dads", but it very much is in some of the specialist groups, and especially on [Redacted].

Another example is we had set up a women's group within the [Redacted], and, out of six females, four of us have endured porno being played on night duty on some of – because we have a club facility where they have, like, all the channels, like Sky and all the other channels, because we have two hours down time and we had to sit and sometimes endure porno being played, very insensitive. I mean, I am one of only – one female that sits in about ten men in a room, and it is very intimidating. Obviously, we do have a very, very long way to go.

Sir William Morris: Okay. I will ask Miss Weekes to pick up the discussion.

Miss Weekes: Thank you very much. Can I come back to part-time flexi-working, because I think it would be regrettable to lose the opportunity to draw out from your experience and expertise at understanding policies, as to the remedies, the way forward, and I take on board one of the comments being made, that that may not be the Met in its entirety; I am not so sure that matters.

There have been at least ten contributions from this audience that indicates regularly there are unlawful actions being committed by management, and that women are being treated badly, inappropriately and unlawfully. Even if it is only ten, it is worth this discussion.

Of course, it may be terribly negative just to leave it there, because we obviously want to assist as best we can, so I would like contributions now, not around the problem, because it is crystal clear and dramatic as to what the problem is, but where do we go from here?

I just want to ask this: is this the first forum that you have had recently where you have been able to talk openly and frankly about the problems? The first one ever. Well, first of all, I wonder why it should be the first one ever. We have some contributions.

Speaker: Sorry, second time. At [Redacted], where I come from, we have meetings twice monthly, just females, which is exactly the same style as this. Any problems that we have are addressed, and obviously minutes are taken, and that gets put to senior management. If they cannot come back with a result, an answer, or an objective view in relation to what we have commented on, then that again gets dealt with, and it goes higher and higher until – you know, if that person is not happy with the result that has come back, for whatever reason, they can continue to pursue the issue, but we do have it every two months, and it is common knowledge, across all of the [Redacted], that, whatever your duty commitments are, you will be released in order to attend that meeting.

It is only if you personally choose that you do not want to go that time that you do not go; you will be released, whatever your tour of duty.

Miss Weekes: Well, that is an example of good practice, thank you for that.

Speaker: Good morning, I am [Redacted] , I am from the [Redacted]. I think it is an endemic problem across the service, it is an issue that has always been too difficult to deal with, and it is an issue that managers like to refer you to policy, and you have to go and deal with that policy yourself.

One of the main problems is there is nowhere for people to go; there is not a point of reference where you know that somebody will pick up the telephone and answer your problem, and this is not just about this issue, this is about so many issues in the police service as a whole, which affect males as well as females, affect white members of staff and black members of staff. The whole problem is leadership and knowledge, and it is right across the board, and whether we have promoted the wrong people, or we have selected the wrong types of characters in post, but I would take a guess that the majority of people sat in this room have a problem with their line managers, as a result of promoting the wrong people, and I think that is where we have got to look at.

We have got to look at the management level which is not trained, is not knowledgeable enough, and are frightened of making decisions; really frightened of making decisions, especially when it comes to women, and being strong, either for or against the situation, but actually just putting it in the "too difficult" tray, and I truly believe that is a massive issue within the police service at the moment.

Miss Weekes: Can I again come back to what we think the solution should be? I made a note that actually the problem is from one extreme to the other: in summary, just taking the childcare issues and part-time, and I think it is very important to realise that men also have these problems with middle management, people are genuinely not aware of the policies.

They do know about them, but they misinterpret them. They do not care. It is open to personal interpretation to suit the manager. People choose whether they have them or not; now I think that is a summary of what you have all said.

Speaker: Could I just add one more that I have come across frequently? I am from the [Redacted], I am a [Redacted]. And that is our management, over many, many years, have always tried to take the easy option out, whether it is right or wrong, they just have tried to sweep things under the carpet and take the easy option, so it means less work for them.

Miss Weekes: Okay, well, thank you, that has added an easy option. Now none of those are satisfactory for women who clearly want to remain in the police force, which is why you have come to this forum, which is why you have not yet left, and it also does not protect you for statutes that are meant to protect you, because they are meant to protect anybody, whether they are male or female, for part-time work.

Do you all think these are the options? I am only suggesting them because I expect I will be wrong, and then it will generate some discussions about where we go. Do you need a central person or persons, to whom, if your line manager does not understand, does not want to know, gets it wrong, you have an immediate line to go to? Can we talk about that as a possible option? What is wrong with it, what is right with it?

Speaker: [Redacted] I would just like to say at this point, number one, is that we used to have a central system whereby policies were generated, but all that was devolved, and that is where the problem is now, because policies are actually open to personal interpretation.

Sorry, I was just saying – I am relatively young in the service, I have only had [Redacted] years, but I do recall that policies were generated centrally before, and the problems have only just stemmed since it has been devolved at local level, which has subsequently – you know, you have got ineffective, inefficient line managers. Like you have just said, they are not aware of policies; if they are, they will have their own interpretation on those policies.

I think, although the MPS is trying to gain corporacy, it is losing that somewhere, because of the inconsistency in decision-making, and that is from top level leadership going all the way down.

In terms of the culture, you have only got to look at the management board, predominantly men; I mean, apart from [Redacted], I do not really know of any other women directors within the MPS.

Miss Weekes: Okay, thank you for that. This is not my idea about a central person, it actually came from the women's representatives of the Federation, who themselves had some interesting things to say about their role on the Federation. It is on the transcript if you wish to read it, I am not going to repeat it in case I have got it wrong.

But they said they wanted a champion, someone up there who will, for a change, listen to, collectively, all of you.

Speaker: Sorry, the only thing with that is are we not negating the fact that you have a manager to manage you, and they should be trained properly, and they should know the policies and they should be able to assist you.

I do agree that, through frustration, you do need that single point of contact, but why are we paying people in roles as managers, whether they be civilian or police officers, if they are not doing their job properly?

Miss Weekes: Well, let me be a little bit more controversial. If you take it back to the line manager, why have not all of you lodged an employment tribunal claim for each of the managers that have refused or inaccurately, deliberately misinterpreted your part-time policies?

Speaker: Can I answer that in one sweeping statement? I am generalising completely, and I do apologise for that, but women are looked – we are having this forum today because women are looked at differently with regard to the police service, that is why we are all here.

If we then complain about the way we are being treated, we will just get looked at even more discriminatively –

Miss Weekes: So what you are now saying is that is – that is a difficult option, because you are bringing a lot more problems on yourself.

Speaker: It would be lovely. I personally had a problem getting a posting – it was nothing to do with being a woman at all. I challenged at a low level, not successful; challenged at a higher level, not successful; had feedback, "Do not do this any more, or you will get problems".

Miss Weekes: Okay, that is one of the options.

Speaker: And that was not as a woman, that is generally posting.

Miss Weekes: And you would say you are quite strong, would you?

Speaker: Definitely.

Miss Weekes: Right. So it is not about strength.

Speaker: No.

Miss Weekes: Can we have a contribution from somebody we have not had yet?

Speaker: [Redacted] I just despair, to be perfectly honest. I encountered part-time working – I was on the [Redacted]. [Redacted]. I tried to go part-time; before I went off on maternity leave I was told, "Yes, no problem, you can go part-time." While I was off I had a complete lack of communication. Two weeks before I was due to come back, "Oh no, there is a problem with you going part-time". It ended up with me having to do a lot of running round.

The long and short of it was I got a sideways move out of proactive operations into a [Redacted] at [Redacted], so I am completely disillusioned.

I thought of making a complaint. I am afraid there is an old school and a new school as far as complaints go, and I did not want to do that. I wanted to deal directly with a person.

I spoke to the Federation, and I arranged a meeting with [Redacted], who is in charge of [Redacted], and also in charge of where I am now.

I spoke to [Redacted] at length, and he was of the opinion, yes, I had been treated badly, and promises, promises, promises, everything will change, and ten months down the line, he said, "Oh yes, I am thinking of setting up a central point of contact, so someone specifically can deal with childcare issues, I will be in contact with you".

That is ten months, nothing has happened, nothing has changed. I have produced evidence to him from detective superintendents that show that their reason for not taking me back part-time was the fact that it would put too much workload on other male officers.

Miss Weekes: And that is an [Redacted]?

Speaker: That is [Redacted], so what chance have we got?

Miss Weekes: All right, well, you are depressing me even more. You do not want to go to court with your line managers. This central person, who could be [Redacted] appears to have let down one person in the audience. Where are we going? We have to leave here with a potential solution and way forward. I might sound very pushy, but I really would like to be a little bit more optimistic. [Redacted]: I am [Redacted], from the directorate of [Redacted], so you got to see a little bit of what goes on there. I am a [Redacted] , basically, and work within the [Redacted] room.

Back in [Redacted], I actually applied for flexible working, which was new to anybody at the directorate of [Redacted], and was initially treated very, very badly by the [Redacted] there, so much so that I did put a complaint in against him, and, since that has all gone through, I have been allowed to do my flexible working, after meeting with the higher management there at the [Redacted], I was allowed to do exactly the shifts that I put in to do; I went from part-time back to full-time, just adding one extra day; I was 32 hours a week, and have gone back to 40 hours a week. So I was asking to actually work an extra day, which was turned down, and my reply was, "No, you are not doing it, because I say so".

I challenged that, and I was verbally abused; not only was I verbally abused, but the two sergeants and my line manager, who supported my application, were also verbally abused by the [Redacted].

As I say, we did put in a complaint against him, he has since been disciplined and has been moved from the directorate, allowing me to return to work in a very happy environment. So it can sometimes work.

Miss Weekes: I will come back. I am still keen to have a solution. What about a champion from your midst? What about somebody here who is prepared to take on this extraordinarily difficult role, and be protected by all of you? Can I have your contribution?

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am the [Redacted] I am so heartened to be here. Some of the stories are depressing, yes, but I would like to say to the Inquiry that the Metropolitan Police Service was never set up with women in mind, and in this, its 175th year, unless we start from that premise, all you will do, in terms of the stories that you hear, is go round in circles.

We are in a phase of transition. We have been there, I suppose, for a long time. We have peaks and troughs with that transition. We have structures that are traditional; traditional structures have given us a traditional culture. Traditional culture has given us traditional responses. And we have people who are pushing at some of those structures, to try and change a culture.

The staff associations have been at the forefront in trying to change some of the culture; Sir Bill talked earlier about a lads' and dads' culture. We know that exists, and many of us in this room have continued, and will continue, in the struggle to improve it.

What we need is stronger leadership, what we need is leadership committed to an organisation that actually wants women, ethnic minority staff, disabled staff, and I am not convinced that we have that in the way that we could have it.

We have people who give a commitment to it, we all know about boards, we know that many people tick boxes to move on to the next rank. There is an issue there with police officers as managers, and I know it is a generic statement, but that is part of the culture; if you are in there, you understand what I mean.

There is also the issue about police staff; often police staff like myself come in from other organisations as managers. We are not police officers, we have an area of expertise, and we are looking to improve that area of expertise in terms of the organisation.

Miss Weekes: I do not want to interrupt you, but that is an excellent summary of where we are at; how do we move it forward? What is your solution as a senior woman in the position you are?

Speaker: Okay, in terms of the work that I have done, trying to support women and in turn engage men in the debate – because it is pointless us trying to struggle as women without recognising that men have a role to play in this. We have a strategy [Redacted] entitled "EnGender", it is a move on from the gender agenda, because the gender agenda failed to recognise that we have police staff as women, and we have a wider family, and we also need to engage men in that.

The gender agenda has sought to look after – or tried to address some of the equal opportunities issues, to increase the number of women accessing training. It is now moving into phase two, and one of the things I would like to see is some kind of strategic forum set up that only focuses on gender, not focuses on other issues of equality. That forum would be directly responsible and accountable to the diversity board; we have a diversity forum, but that diversity forum looks at a range of things.

There are a range of people – it is interesting to see people in here today who work on issues of gender, but almost in isolation. [Redacted] tries to co-ordinate and pull that together, but we have the same sorts of issues as any organisation, if you can find another one, the health service is probably the comparator, of 43,000 people –

Miss Weekes: We have so many other contributions, could you just shorten –

Speaker: Fine, there is a suggestion, a strategic forum. Management board is "man"-agement board. There is one woman there, de facto the Commissioner's staff officer, who tries to push women's issues on the board, but she is not a member of the management board. Strong leadership at the top, committed to these issues, which I think will come from the Morris Inquiry and external forces pushing the organisation to embrace some of the changes that you have already outlined.

Miss Weekes: Can I just ask – I sense you would like to continue this discussion at this particular stage, is that right? Because, if people have other burning issues, I know that Sir Anthony Burden would like to come in, but I am actually rather anxious to get a bit more coherent idea of the solutions.

Speaker: As well as my role as a [Redacted], I was a [Redacted] for two years, and I did gender as part of my portfolio, [Redacted].

I think it would be good to have something similar, and also, we have a [Redacted] first contact support, where, if some of our members have problems and they have gone through their Federation or union, they then come to us. Maybe setting up a centralised women's group, where there is a co-ordinator and further training given to some females who want to take part to give their added expertise and experiences –

Miss Weekes: Are you confident that such a group would not be – I am being critical to be of assistance; if I am wrong, tell me. Are you confident that such a group would not be inward looking, that you will not go over the problems again, like you are doing today, in the absence of men, that you will not actually move the agenda to, "How do I deal with middle management?"

Speaker: I think we have also got the issues, but there needs to be some awareness training of some sort to supervise, and some of the men who have been in the organisation, which is something that we are going to have to look at, to work with, because we have problems with the way we are perceived as females in employment and on childcare and everything else; we have to look at a solution for how we can address the men, how they see us in the organisation, which is, you know, something we have got to work with.

Miss Weekes: A contribution at the back, and then at the front. There is obviously a need for women themselves to understand where they are going before they communicate with men; I have no difficulties with that.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] officer at [Redacted] and I am also a [Redacted] representative. We have 32 boroughs doing 32 different things, and numerous various autonomous departments interpreting the policies in their own way. I think whilst, on the one hand, it may be progress to have devolved to 32 boroughs and departments, because we now effectively have no corporacy, each borough and department is autonomous and corporate to itself; then within that, we have management of all levels interpreting policies in their own way; then, if we wish to be a corporate organisation, we are doomed to fail, because we have 32 plus, however many autonomous departments we have, doing their own thing in their own way, and it only comes home to roost for us as an organisation when it goes wrong, when it becomes high-profile, and we find we are doing our washing not quite internally any more.

I would also be very concerned at the suggestion that we would be actively suggesting to people that we put in employment tribunals in order to deal with the problem. As a [Redacted] representative, yes, I would applaud this and it would make me very happy on one hand, but we have to deal with the people who are actually the subject of the employment tribunals.

It is a big deal putting in a Fairness at Work; a Fairness at Work, in my opinion, is usually doomed to fail, because it is non-participatory unless the people wish to participate. They do not have to follow any of the outcomes that come. It is an academic exercise, so management can tick boxes and pretend they have listened. There is nothing between Fairness at Work and an employment tribunal.

If a member of the police staff wishes to put in a complaint against a member of the police service who has done, in their opinion, some wrongdoing, the only way of doing it is a Fairness at Work – or if that does not meet their needs, a formal complaint against police, which is nearly impossible to achieve, and nor would most staff, in fairness, wish to do that. They just want a productive way of dealing with internal issues. That works, where everybody has confidence in, is open and transparent and happens in a non-threatening way.

Miss Weekes: I hate to ask you, but what is it? What is the solution? If people do not want to take employment tribunals – and it is perfectly understandable why they will not – how do you deal with a manager who refuses to understand and incorporate part-time work?

Speaker: You have a policy that deals with unfairness and complaints at work that is open, transparent and workable, and of which there is a seeable, clear sanction at the end: if you fail in your duty, this is what will happen.

And if we had effective managers managing effective managers, then it would happen and people would say, "Hang on a minute, why are these people unhappy? You have failed in your duty as a manager".

Why are the people unhappy? Because the manager above that manager has failed in their duty as a manager, because their concerns are not managerial, their concerns are about meeting the overarching needs of the organisation, which often forgets about the little people at the bottom, so if the managers do not manage effectively – and this organisation has appalling management, because they do not have the ability to manage.

Speaker: [Redacted] again. Just going back to solutions, I mean, one of the things that the [Redacted] is recommending at the moment is a positive action programme for women which I understand the MPS has not undertaken as yet.

I mean, the MPS, you know, in one of its statements says that it respects diversity, but all the evidence here shows that this is certainly not the case. I think a positive action programme would be very good in terms of motivating, valuing female employees within this organisation.

Miss Weekes: Somebody mentioned sanctions; there is a contribution there and there. Go back to Fairness at Work, I am picking up on the contribution at the back of the room – go back to Fairness at Work and the ET claim. Let us have something in between that is more firm, that grips the problem. If the manager has not managed, let us think about some sanctions; well, what are the sanctions? What do you want, as women, to be the sanction if a manager has fundamentally failed over a policy that he should have been aware of, and because he has been trained, or she, should have understood? What do we mean by sanctions? I will come to you in a second.

Speaker: Demotion, resignation.

Miss Weekes: How many of you want to see that happening in the workplace? How many of you are prepared for that to happen? Well, I can see nods, but does anybody think that is a good idea? [Redacted]: It depends how severe the problem is, the situation.

Miss Weekes: I have had a contribution in the front: it depends how severe the problem is.

Speaker: Training is a big key issue, that is the main thing. There is no time set aside for training at the moment. You have got to be out there, you have got to do this, this commitment, that commitment, whereas senior management read through the policies coming out scan through it, "It does not apply to me at the moment" (inaudible) whereas if they have time set aside in their timetable, that day you will actually sit down and go through and try and understand it, and if you have not, then there is someone you can speak to, I think that is a main issue. They do not have the time to put into reading and understanding these policies.

Miss Weekes: Well, can I ask this then? Would it help if there was a forum like this with managers, a compulsory one-day forum with managers, on flexi-time, part-time work, so you talk the whole thing through?

Same Speaker: Yes, I think it would be educational for them, because then they could understand it.

Speaker: [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] rep. I think what is needed is an audit trail for people requesting family-friendly policies; working, maternity leave, whatever. So when an individual puts a request into the personnel department, a copy of that request should automatically go to a central department.

Now, if there are any problems in that, hopefully there is somebody who is taking an objective and detached view, and can come to an agreement, if there is an impasse at local level, because that is the problem our colleagues have said: in this devolved Met, there are not clear, concise instructions to managers, there is not a proper audit trail for individuals, and there is no actual practical way of complaining. Thank you.

Miss Weekes: What about that as a suggestion? It is reasonably neutral, it does not involve the woman putting herself at risk and making herself vulnerable in front of her workmates, and this audit trail will be picked up by a central person who will co-ordinate between your – how many boroughs? 36. Could I just have a show of hands where we are with this debate? Does that help, that suggestion? (Pause).

Okay, I think there were some other contributions, and I lost slightly the trail of where we were.

Speaker: I spoke at the beginning, yes. Just while we are talking about this, something like a central office, as the lady was just saying, that we could perhaps apply to: if you wanted to go part-time or change your hours or something like that.

It may be that two people are doing the same job, because your personnel department perhaps should be doing that, I am not sure, but for me, I know, if there was a central part-time workers' office somewhere that I could contact them and say, "I would like to change my hours, I want to do something different", whatever, they would fight my battles for me, because I have just had a constant, constant battle, and I am so sort of battle weary now that I cannot be bothered to fight any more, and if there was a central department – and perhaps they could also incorporate a pool of part-time jobs which were available, perhaps you could then apply to different jobs if you wanted to.

It would be nice if there was a central co-ordinator, with people working on your behalf as a part-timer.

Miss Weekes: So you do not mind that managers are now taken out of the loop for not managing this issue? Because that is what that suggestion suggests.

Speaker: Thank you. I will not bore you too long, but a couple of things. As a manager, I feel very threatened by a lot of the suggestions being made within the forum that, if we do not know policy, we should get sacked or demoted. That scares me very much. Recently, I had an issue where a mother – I am not a mother, I am not part-time, so I have not got any of this, but I am very passionate about these issues, that is why I was asked to come – wanted a carer day.

I read the carer day instruction in the policy one way, another colleague read it another way, and that is the problem, the policies are not clear. I think we have all talked about that already.

But secondly, training; we do not want to sack people, we do not want to go to industrial tribunals. I would rather have a bit of training than get sacked, thank you very much, and that is what it comes down to: training. We need more training.

A lot of the issues we are talking about today are not women issues, they are male and female issues, part-time, flexi-time, and women are getting bad press because we are looking at these issues from a woman's perspective.

I used to work in [Redacted] borough and I am still part of their gender agenda, which is really progressive at the moment. It unfortunately has not got any males on the committee, but we are working on that – apart from the chair, who is very supportive. And we have now got together police staff, police officers, a maternity pack; we have a buddy system. You know, people who have gone through what you have gone through, you do not have to go to your line manager, you can go to the buddy. You are allocated a buddy, if you want one, when you have all these issues, part-time, maternity leave, for both police staff and police officers, and we have also got a central point of contact for part-time workers who want a job share.

Why has it taken us this long in the Met to realise that if you want to go part-time, it should not be a big issue? You know, there should be a central point of contact, like we had in [Redacted], for the whole of the Met, where there are vacancies for job shares.

The lady over there said she has not got a job at the moment, because she could not go back to where she worked; that is ridiculous, in today's society, she has not got a job, because where she worked could not facilitate what she wanted.

Miss Weekes: So you should be able to go and download all the part-time jobs available through all the boroughs?

Speaker: Absolutely, and all the departments.

Miss Weekes: Who is going to do that?

Speaker: Well, this is what we are talking about today. You keep saying to us you want solutions; I have been in the police service for 15 years now, and way before my time, we have never had solutions yet, so if you are expecting solutions from us today, I think you will be disappointed, but we will try and help.

Miss Weekes: No, that is good enough.

Speaker: I think there are champions within this forum who are passionate about this system, not just because we are women. I think that is a big point that we are missing here. Okay, breast feeding, yes, that is women. But most of the other issues are not a woman thing.

Miss Weekes: It is a valid point.

Speaker: I mean, I would ask, has a male forum been asked to be assembled for the Morris Inquiry?

Miss Weekes: No.

Speaker: Then we will go out there and they will say, "What have you done today, [Redacted], why have you not been at work?" "I have been at a female forum for the Morris Inquiry". That gives us bad press straight away.

Miss Weekes: But I think you all understand why we felt we needed to do it. Do you all understand?

Speaker: Absolutely, but this forum, which hopefully will set up the strategic point of contact, hopefully will not have any mention of specifically women's issues in it, but will be staffed by men and women, because if men do not realise the problems you have with breast feeding, and I do not, unfortunately, but I can imagine, then they cannot be expected to understand. Unless they are fathers, then how can they understand the issues?

Speaker: Most of the leaders in our organisation are men.

Speaker: Exactly, if the managers do not know, and the managers are men, then we are fighting a losing battle, but we should be positive.

Miss Weekes: Just checking timing with the chairman, we have time just before our break for two more contributions. Those who have not spoken.

Speaker: I am a [Redacted]. I do not know anything about care issues, but I have disabilities caused by an injury at work, and I would actually say it is not just about women, it is about the way – if you are a problem to the Met, they will do everything in their power to get rid of you. They will, you know, make everything so difficult.

I have no role at the moment, I have just come back from a career break, and I have been told that it is too difficult to find me a meaningful role. So if you have an issue, whether it be – if you are a male officer, it applies to them as well: disabilities, childcare; if you are a problem – if you are not a robot, if you do not work 40 hours a week and do exactly what you are told, if you are not sitting in a little box as a pigeonhole, you are a nightmare, and they will do what they can to get rid of you, and to make your life as difficult as possible. It is not just about care issues.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], and I am a mere PC on the [Redacted]. I think we have got to change attitudes. It is the same as with race. We have got to change attitudes, it is the only way. I think the comment about sacking, demotion, that is one of the ways. Until it is a personal, individual, "It is my responsibility, I have made the decision that this person is not going to be treated fairly", it has got to go back to that person, and I think that is the only way you are going to change this job, because unfortunately, they cover themselves with the policy, "But it is the individual's decision", and it has to go back to them.

Miss Weekes: We are going to break now, but it does not end there, we have got some more after the break.

Sir William Morris: We have a break now, I think there is some coffee laid on, and can I suggest we resume at 12.00, please?

11.45 am
(A short break)
12.00 pm

Sir William Morris: Can I say welcome back? We want to maximise the time and the opportunity for us to have our conversation, so I will pass you straight over to Sir Anthony to raise one or two of the topics which are listed on the note previously circulated.

Sir Anthony Burden: Well, Chairman, could I just, at the risk of upsetting somebody, I am just going to give a strategic assessment as I see the situation, having listened to what you have said this morning.

And I am sorry, I think the issues that you have raised are so far off the radar screen in terms of the Metropolitan Police at the moment that something has to be done to actually raise the agenda at the very top of the organisation, because unless you have got the person at the top saying that your issues are important, you are going to get nowhere.

Forums are okay, but they just turn into talking shops, and you know the culture of the Met, if it is a forum around women's issues, that will get labelled women's issues, and if you alienate male managers even more, then you set yourself back two stages, as opposed to taking the issue forward.

So, you know, the traditional representative groups, it would seem to me, having heard the evidence, and I mean the Federation, are not promoting women's issues sufficiently, in terms of serving officers. Even the BPA, and I do accept everything you say, all the tremendous work you have done in creating women's forums – but the people at the top of the BPA are not putting women's issues at the forefront where they should be.

I would just say this to you: if we could, as a panel, put a strong recommendation that said – because, I mean, as a group, you are so strong in numbers, police and police staff in the Met, that you really do warrant a seat at the top table, but if it is not going to come through the Federation or through the BPA or other representative groups, it has to come, I think, through a women's forum; be championed by somebody that is actually at that table, and saying to the Commissioner, "Family-friendly policies need to be properly promoted, and your female staff need to be valued, they need to be valued as such important contributors to policing London".

Now, can I just ask you, as a collective group representing your colleagues, if that sort of thing – and that is only first thoughts, it needs to be polished, but if that could be done to raise the issue strategically, the macro issues, to actually get the message down to managers, male managers, many of them, "Look, what has been allowed to go on will not be condoned in any form, and family-friendly policies and related issues are so important to me as the head of this organisation, I am going to take a personal interest in what is going on", would you support that? I mean, is it something you would see as being valuable? And please, if it is not, say so.

Speaker: [Redacted] again from [Redacted] operational support. There is a Commissioner's women's focus group that meets with the Commissioner. With the problems I had during my pregnancy, I e-mailed one of the representatives of that and I got back an e-mail saying, "Yes, this is something that is coming up quite commonly that we are being told about", so there is already some conduit to the Commissioner for women that is not very well-known about.

I have not actually seen that it has done anything much, and there is also the new childcare co-ordinator, she sent out a questionnaire, and I responded to that, about the problems I had had with part-time working and childcare, and again, I got one back saying, "Yes, this is really coming up very commonly from women", which is obviously the same response you are getting here today, "and is it not really bad?" Well, yes, it is, and is it not time they did something about it?

And now we have got a new Met HR system, where we can actually track centrally how many people in the OCUs are part-time, how many people are going off on maternity leave, so why can they not centrally look – and they could do breakdowns on what levels the part-timers are working at, whether they are on response teams, whether they are being made to take office jobs, which is something I have quite often heard, that operational police officers are shifted into admin.

It should be able to get a picture of that at the centre, because they are being told, and getting it through various forums, and nothing is being done. As an organisation that likes statistics, they have got the capability now of actually finding that out from their Met HR data.

Sir Anthony Burden: Forgive me again, but if it is going to the top and it is not being listened to, you are obviously a voice that has not got the clout at the moment to actually make people sit up and take notice, because if all it is being passed off as, "Oh, yes, some more statistics about dissatisfied members of staff", and it is just being pushed to one side, then we have got to try and do something to give you a strength of voice, and the co-ordination – maybe there needs to be – I mean, you are such a disparate organisation, 32 boroughs, numerous specialist departments, that it is difficult, I do appreciate, for you to get a voice that says, "Look, this is a voice of female staff within the Metropolitan Police, not just individuals within it", and I just wonder, you know –

Speaker: I mean, it is in existence, the Commissioner's women's focus group, but previously to this year, they would not have been able to get that statistical information from Met HR, because PIMS was not set up like that. This is a Met-wide system, and they can get information from it, so maybe they should be.

Speaker: I just wondered if there is an ACPO responsibility for women's issues, because this whole issue cannot solely be attributed to the Metropolitan Police Service, it must be right across the UK, and surely that is a line that needs to be maybe tapped into, I am not sure whether that ACPO officer is a Metropolitan Police officer, but if that is in existence already, perhaps that can be expanded on.

Sir Anthony Burden: And we have visited police services that are doing much better for women staff, let me say, but I do not think as a leader of an organisation, an ex-leader of an organisation, you can abdicate your responsibilities for actually managing your people.

Same Speaker: Perhaps we can learn from –

Sir Anthony Burden: Yes, I think absolutely.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], and the Commissioner's women's group did report to management board early this month, DAC Carol Howlett reported, but even there, there are additional issues for VEM women which have not been raised. One PC who is VEM pointed out that in her experience, there is a hierarchy in the workplace: White male, white female, VEM male and VEM female.

Now the Commissioner has heard this first hand, so it will be interesting to see what happens, because, later on, in the same meeting, he said he is meeting with about 30 or 40 senior police staff later on. It will be interesting to see the composition of that group, because there will be white women in that group, but how many VEM males or females? It will be interesting to see.

And slightly off the point, at management board again, somebody pointed out that middle management are the most difficult people to get through to. Recommendations from the Lawrence Inquiry – they will observe perhaps certain policies, but they do not seem to be committed to it, and this comes across when something like the Secret Policeman is shown on television, and the discussions that take place, conversations that take place, show that middle managers who do not have to be seen to be taking action do not take something like that seriously, whereas senior management, who have to be seen to take action, will say the right things.

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you.

Speaker: It is just a question I want to ask really. In your opening statement you talked about family-focused mechanisms. What sort of context do you mean? Are you talking about all forms of family-focused mechanisms, because, as a female who has no children, I think that I should be entitled to apply for things like, for instance, part-time working, as much as my colleague who has got children.

There should not be a choice between, "Can I allow this officer to work part-time because she has childcare concerns?", as opposed to, "Can I allow this officer to work part-time because she is studying something which will benefit the organisation?" There should not be that choice. That has been my experience, that there has been a balance – you know, we need to strike a fair balance as well, in terms of those who have other concerns, those who may need to utilise part-time working for other reasons, other than childcare, and I think that you are excluding then a certain other group as well, and marginalising another group.

As one who speaks from the other side of the coin, I would like certainly to see all considerations around part-time working – I wholly accept that childcare issues are key, but I think that you should not then – managers should not be put in a position or certainly should not be making decisions on childcare versus another member of staff's reasons for going part-time.

So in terms of – you know, you talk about family focus; this Inquiry should consider all formats of what a family entails, what a family means.

Sir Anthony Burden: Sure. Can I assure you of that? It is about work/life balance, it is about the individual, about elderly care, about childcare, across the whole board. We do understand that, thank you.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in the directorate of [Redacted] I think this issue is a question of winning hearts and minds, and I am not quite sure how we do that. Having a women's representative at management board would be certainly a start, because there is a major leadership issue surrounding all issues of flexible working which do not just apply to women, it applies to men as well, in my experience.

But one of the factors that I think pervades through this organisation is that flexible working may be accepted at a certain level, but if a woman, for example, wishes to seek promotion, then it is pretty much the standard practice that you really – unless you are committed to full-time, then you are at a serious disadvantage.

That is something that has not been addressed at senior level, and it is notable that senior women in the organisation – there are very few part-time senior women, and the message is: if you want to get on as a woman, then you have to adapt to the male macho culture that has always been predominant.

Sir Anthony Burden: I mean, is that not what we are trying to break down? It is this macho culture, that you have to work 12 hours a day to be seen to contribute, and if you do not, then you know, that really is something which is frowned upon.

The message needs to come down from on high, it seems to me, that says, "Come on, we are going to break this cycle and actually deliver work/life balance for staff, because we are all better employees if we have that work/life balance".

Speaker: [Redacted] from the [Redacted] team on [Redacted]. Women in the police force have moved mountains in the last X amount of hundred years that we have been in the police force. My big concern here today is that by focusing directly on women, you are actually helping us move two steps backwards, which you have already mentioned. The two overriding issues that I have heard this morning are childcare and part-time working, which affect people's lives tremendously, but that is not just a women's problem. That is gender – and I know this is a women's forum, but my biggest fear is the more women's forums you make, you are just isolating us from all the hard work that we have put in for the last X amount of years.

It is a massive problem, and I think, to me, the overriding thing here, it is a leadership problem, and there is a lady over there that mentioned the standard of the management and the supervision, and it is not just the Met; as I have said earlier, I speak from three different police forces. It is despicable. The standard is dreadful, and you are expecting very, very young in age officers and young in service officers to make people's life decisions, and to have an impact on that.

That is not fair on the person that they are making the decision for, or helping; the responsibility on them is tremendous, and how – basically, if it all goes wrong, it is going to roll downhill, and it is going to come on that, and the service is not supporting those young officers that are supervisors.

It is the gender thing that I think undoubtedly has got to be mentioned, and my biggest fear is that women are going to be isolated yet again. This is a gender problem, not just women.

Sir Anthony Burden: We will take more hands up, but can I just throw this in? I would like you to tell me, please, or tell us how much you think a possible blame culture has an impact on this organisation, where supervisors are not willing to take risks and make decisions, for fear of being criticised themselves, and therefore they revert to the policies, as opposed to saying, "Well, you have got an individual problem, I am going to try and help you sort that problem out, and I am going to go one step further than the policy perhaps suggests, because it is important that you get that sort of leeway".

Speaker: I am sorry, I came in a bit late, and I presume we are talking about life/work balances. I would just like to let you know of a situation I have got. My [Redacted] was diagnosed with [Redacted] last year, and I did not ask for any special leave or privileges.

This year, I was told that my time management was bad, I owed no flexi-time – I am a flexi-worker. I owed no flexi-time, I owed no time whatsoever; I was given this list of dates. One day I worked 11 hours to get a case to court the next day – I am sorry, my name is [Redacted], and I am a civilian at [Redacted] That was a slap on the wrist.

When I told both my EOs that both my [Redacted] were suffering [Redacted], they then made my time even more rigid by saying I had to be in at 8.00, take an hour's lunch, and leave at 4.00. I had no support whatsoever.

They did actually say that I had not mentioned my [Redacted], but when they did know about that, that is when they put the rigid work times in place. I have had no support whatsoever; in fact, they have made me ill on the back of this, because not only – my [Redacted] [Redacted], so not only have I had to cope with that, I have had to cope with the constant phone calls and non-support of the Metropolitan Police.

Now that, to me, is not a work/life balance. Sorry.

Sir William Morris: Just to make one or two observations, because it is a very interesting discussion we are having, and we are seeing it from different perspectives; believe me, the issues that we are debating this morning are not exclusive to the Metropolitan Police Service, and therefore, whilst, when you break it down, what you are looking at are, if you like, the disproportionate impact of some negative policies on particular groups within the organisation, fundamentally, the start point is, in this instance – it is society's problem, because society is not getting the absolutely full and total contribution from a large part of its citizens, the workforce.

But setting aside that broader macro issue, it is the organisation's problem, the institution which is deficient in not getting the full and total contribution from its investment, its people, the most important resource, is the organisation, the Metropolitan Police Service, and that is where the thing starts. So it is not about men and women, it is about the organisation, full stop.

And that leads into exactly what you say, Tony, that it demands leadership, it demands absolute total example, because you have to develop the culture within the organisation, and the people within the organisation need to know precisely what are its values and what are the expectations.

Now where I perhaps take a slightly different view in terms of how you break down the issues from a gender perspective, I take the view that the victims of any discrimination, whether it is gender, race, sexuality, disability or whatever, the victims must have a contribution to make in devising the solution. The victims must speak for themselves. It is about empowerment, and it is about giving them a voice.

You know, you can go back and say that if you had left it to the whites in South Africa, South Africa would still have apartheid today; you had to bring in the victims of discrimination in South Africa to fight for the solution.

So let me just share this with you: fundamentally, at the end of the day, people are making decisions and they are exercising power, and those who have power do not give it up voluntarily. It has to be fought for, argued for, it has to be challenged, to get power.

But the way that the argument has to be presented – not on the basis of an individual, and I accept the fact that if I have childcare requirements or granny care requirements, or whatever it is, it is a problem for me, in essence, but, in the end, we have to put the argument forward that the organisation is deficient, and it is not sort of delivering of its best, it is not maximising its investment and the potential of its people, because it has got a certain deficiency in the policies.

So that is basically where we are coming from, and in the end, you have to say, "Right, this is why you have these support groups. Okay, you have got gender, you have got race, you have got disability, you have got sexuality, you determine your solutions to contribute, but then you have to bring those solutions back to the top table for the common good".

And I have always argued – in my organisation that I worked for previously, when I joined initially, they wanted to send me on a training course to learn about equality, and I said, "I am sorry, I am a victim here, I do not want to go on any training courses, it is the people who are carrying out the discrimination who have to go on the training course".

So you are absolutely right, we have to have some forum for the men too, because the men in the Met are exercising the power, because there is far more of them than the women, and we have to let them understand that fundamentally, they are the ones who are contributing in holding the Met back from fulfilling its total potential and serving London as it should be served.

So this is not a one-day debate, I have to tell you, it is fundamentally – what we are looking at here is to bring out as part of this debate, so that we can make some rational assessment, as to how we go back to the Met and say, "Look, you have got a problem here, you really need to start addressing it, and addressing it on the basis of the organisation's needs, because if you do not do that, then quite frankly you are missing out on a lot of the potential of the people that you are serving".

So let us sort of just recognise those sort of realities, because that is how we have to address this issue, to make the long and lasting change that is necessary for this institution.

Sorry about that.

Speaker: I think whilst we have identified that there is a lads' culture, I think what is also coming out is there is a management culture which is weak, weak in communication, weak in leadership, and there is a serious problem in the Met with a lack of confidence within senior managers in the Metropolitan Police Service.

Speaker: I totally agree, we do need a women's forum, and we do need to be heard. This organisation has been run by men for a number of years. What we need is for the Commissioner to actually say he takes on the issues of women. We have all of our flexible learning policies, we have all of these policies, but they do not have any teeth. If the Commissioner said, "I wholeheartedly support the issues that women are facing and all the other groups are facing", and then said to his managers underneath him, "Well actually, this is our policy, this is mandatory, there are no ifs, buts or maybes in it", then it goes down to the next level and then it will eventually come down to our line managers.

I suffer from three strikes, being black, female and police staff, because, let us face it, being a police officer, you are wearing a uniform, you are representing the Metropolitan Police Service. Being a police staff, you are supporting the service, and on lots of occasions, we are an afterthought.

The police officers are first, inquiries are about the police officers first, and then the police staff. We have to stop this, and have this fair policy right across the board, where we are talking about staff in general. It does not matter if you are a police officer or a police staff, it is fair across the board, and the Commissioner, as head of our organisation, needs to make that point straight.

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you very much.

Speaker: I have a question, I am not sure if anyone will be able to answer. Do we know the percentage of male officers within the Metropolitan Police that are part-timers?

Sir Anthony Burden: We have the statistics.

Same Speaker: I just wonder – we are brought here to discuss that, but they obviously encounter – I personally know one officer who is husband and wife who are in the job, and the husband wants to go part-time, but has said it is easier for the lady to go part-time than for him. Not from prejudice, but he just says it is harder for him to face the corporation.

I just think, if we worked as a team, men, women, everybody, and fought this resentment, if you like, to flexi-hours and part-time work, and got support in every angle from senior management in any decision we make, then we are going to go a lot further forward, instead of saying, "Well, men suffer it, but they can have their own forum; women suffer it, they can have their own forum". Let us get together, join them together, and fight it together, and bring everybody on board.

I just feel at the moment, we are sitting here – we should have men here as well. They experience exactly what us girls think, women, females, and I think we should just unite and do it together, instead of keep alienating each other into different pockets, and I do think that senior management do need to be seen to support their staff, and if they do make wrong decisions, challenged as to why, instead of just brushing it under the carpet.

Sir Anthony Burden: I think one of the suppressed statistics which would not be available, but we may be able to get it, because there are some plans to issue a questionnaire around this, is the suppressed demand for work/life balance policies. I do think, from what I have heard, that there are lots of people out there, male and female staff in the Metropolitan Police, that would ask if they did not feel it would be held against them for asking, or if there was a fair chance of getting it, they would probably ask.

I do think there is a suppressed demand for this; I think all you see is the people that are brave enough to put their head above the parapet and continue to fight for it that actually get it. But no, I think the principles –

Same Speaker: I think it is so important we work together.

Sir Anthony Burden: Absolutely, and I do accept everything that has been said about labelling issues as, you know, women's issues or whatever they are, which creates even further divides, because we know how strong the culture is that you are working within, and that cannot be ignored if you are looking for success, and you must work within what you have got, I think.

Speaker: Shall I just say my thing, as I have got the mike?

Sir Anthony Burden: Once you have got the mike, you have got the power.

Speaker: I was going to harp on yet again about this issue of women's issues. As my colleague over there said, only two things we have talked about today are women's issues; one of them breast feeding, clearly a woman's issue. The Commissioner has got a women's committee, and if anyone here is in it, then I would like to hear from them, because Operation Oakley and the Morris Inquiry have been set up since last October, and by the looks on your faces, you did not even know about the Commissioner's women's group.

That is no criticism of yourselves, but we are here today and we have not got one representative from the only voice that women have, switching women issues, gender issues here again.

But if that is the only forum to address a lot of these issues, surely someone should be here from that committee, and it has been set up for a few years now, and most people here did not know about it, yourselves did not know about it; we are talking about the whole gender issue. Nobody knows anything about it, nobody knows what is going on.

That just says what the Commissioner's view is about these issues, whether it be applied to women or men or both. I just think the looks on your faces said it all really.

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you.

Speaker: I just want to say something about the fact that middle managers are predominantly men and the issues around how women get promoted and the examination system and all those sorts of things. I think especially women who have caring responsibilities – the way in which OSPRE is constructed makes it incredibly difficult for women to go through the promotion process, and it is true that the further up the chain you get, the less likely you are to do part-time because of the pressures, so I think that needs looking at as well, the way in which we are promoted and how that actually affects women who have caring responsibility.

Sir Anthony Burden: That is absolutely valid, and I think the point that Sir Bill made there reinforces what you are saying. If you have got a voice at the table, then those sorts of issues will actually determine and steer the way that promotion processes develop. If you are not there, that cannot be said. If the promotion processes remain in the hands of male officers and staff, you are never going to break through that ceiling.

And I do understand what you are saying – please, I do understand what you are saying about labelling things, but sometimes the debate is so far back, you know, in the woods that you do need to start with basic building blocks.

I do get a sense that the debate is that far back in some areas; depressingly, I do.

Speaker: [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] borough. It is going back to the management issue. My colleagues over there were saying earlier there is a lot of great cynicism about the senior management in this organisation which – I have got [Redacted] years' service, that goes back certainly all my service, and way beyond. A lot of the problem is right at the top, how you go about selecting senior managers. It is common knowledge that above superintendent level, to get the next rank, you have got to tick certain boxes. You have got to develop a female member of staff, support ethnic minorities and so on.

All these people are doing is they are ticking the box once and then moving on to the next one. They have no interest at all in personnel, they have only interest in gaining the next rank. I have seen that from two sides. One of my senior officers in my borough at my station who did support his troops, he was a male officer, who showed great support for his troops, and he got sideways moved, as a result of showing that support.

Another even more senior officer, whose name I will not mention, is very good at paying lip service. He will promise you the world, he comes across as the most approachable man in the world. If you challenge him, if you lay down the gauntlet and try and pick up on what he has promised, he cannot deliver; and that is the problem.

As Mr Morris said there, they are not willing to put their head above the parapet, because all they are concerned about is gaining the next rank, and perhaps that needs to be looked at, a better way of selecting senior managers.

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you.

Speaker: [Redacted], it has come to a point whereby I can look on paper and tell you who is going to be selected even before they go for interview, so it is a matter of – the client has already chosen his person, but because of selection procedure, we have to go a certain way, and it is just getting completely ridiculous. Directors are being selected on the basis of what they see on paper and not having any other skills, especially people skills.

I look at the criteria and all you see is how to, like, get strategic results, and not looking at the way they deal with people in the office or whatever, so that is a really big issue at the moment, but obviously there is no one to take responsibility, and once you say it to someone you work with, they just say, "Oh, just get on with it, that is the job you have to do".

Sir Anthony Burden: So can I just test that? What you are saying is, reinforcing what the lady said over here, that it is what you put on your application form, so you can prove the competencies in key areas –

Same Speaker: Definitely, yes. You can write pages and pages. I see them on a day-to-day basis, and it is just ridiculous. You see some women actually do apply, like for maybe a band A level, director level, and you just see them get brushed aside straight away, because they look at them and say, "Well, if this person has got childcare responsibilities, how is she going to work a 50-hour week? How is she going to be able to do the job that a man can do better?" It happens every day.

Sir Anthony Burden: [Redacted].

Same Speaker: [Redacted].

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you very much indeed.

Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I work in the [Redacted] department for the [Redacted] directorate. The experience I have had is our HR managers are great at telling everybody else what they should be doing, great at promoting the family friendly, let us make sure all our employees are happy in their work, fantastic.

When it comes to somebody in our department wanting to go part-time after [Redacted] wanted to come back part-time; facilitated that just about, only on the, "I want to do two days", "But we want you to do three days, so you can do three days".

She then got pregnant again when she came back to work, fantastic, could not have been happier, but now, she has gone off on maternity leave again; the HR manager – "Well, is she going to come back? Is she going to take a career break? Can we convince her to take a career break, because that way we can fill her post?"

The post that is vacant, I think it is a three-day-a-week post, she has now been moved to a different department without even being told she has been moved to a different department, because she is on maternity leave, so it does not matter. She does not know she has been moved, she is on maternity leave.

So I have got an HR manager sitting there saying, "That person has to do this properly because policy says so", and yet, when it comes to our colleagues sitting in our office, "Oh, but we need that job done, we need it done on a full-time basis, it cannot be done on a part-time basis".

There is no, "That person works three days a week, so we will employ somebody else to cover the other two days", it is just a case of, "We will write off that post because ...", you know, not – okay, there is five days' worth of work needs to be done in three days; when that person comes in for three days, they have got immense pressure on them to get the work done, so she comes in, and she feels like she has got five days of work to do in three days, cannot cope with it; she feels really bad, because she is letting us down.

It is not her letting us down, it is us letting her down, but that is from an HR manager. Who am I to go and say, "You should not do that, that is naughty, policy does not say that"; I cannot.

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you.

Speaker: Can I plead devil's advocate and say that also, being a woman in the job, that we are not always fairly helped out by our own female colleagues? I have a {Redacted] who has obviously done the lads' and dads' culture, and she will not accept if you have got a female problem. And it is not just myself, every female officer under her command has been to the Federation now. So we are not always supported by female officers, and we are not always helped by other officers, maybe female officers, to be rude, taking the mickey. That is a problem, and that is how it has been for the [Redacted] years I have been in the job.

I have fought and fought, but if you are up against other women letting you down, we have to accept that is an issue, and female officers higher than myself are not helping at all, because they will not accept that females – they have taken on the male role, that is fine for them, but we all have points.

Miss Weekes: I know there are hands up, but I would like to come in on an issue that is really burning for me, and it is not a woman's issue: selection of managers. We have heard some extremely depressing news from a large number of male officers and staff that bad managers are promoted or sidelined or moved to a cushy job. I can see lots of heads nodding. So I thought I wanted to bring up – because it was a point over here, and I did not want to lose it.

The selection of managers, from my understanding, from what I have read so far, is linked to rank: the higher up you go, the more people you manage. You automatically become a manager by promotio

Skip Navigation \| Accessible

Accessibility About the Inquiry Contacts Search
Home News Schedule Transcripts Evidence Report Links
Transcripts > Women’s Forum (18 May 04)
QuickSearch	Previous Next	Views Print Accessible Actions Send
	Archive note Important note: This is an archive of the website that was formerly at www.morrisinquiry.gov.uk. It is being hosted on the MPA website for archival purposes only and may contain out-of-date information. Page summary This resource is from the Transcripts section. This section contains a transcript of the private session of the Women’s Forum on 18 May 2004. Sections available here: Transcript of private session: Women’s Forum Alternative versions This transcript is also available with original line and page numbering. Content Transcript of private session: Women’s Forum Tuesday, 18 May 2004 10.30 am The names of those present at this session and any references in the transcript that could lead to identification of individuals or third parties have been removed. Sir William Morris: Well, good morning everyone. Can I first of all say welcome to the Morris Inquiry's Women's Forum? Right at the outset, I want to record that my colleagues and myself are delighted to see so many women officers and members of staff from the Met here this morning. We are looking forward to learning your views on a number of very important issues. But first, some introductions. I am Sir Bill Morris, recently retired General Secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union, and I chair the Inquiry. As you can see, there are two other members of the panel: on my right is Sir Anthony Burden, who recently retired as Chief Constable of the South Wales Constabulary, after a very long and distinguished career in the police service. On my left is Miss Anesta Weekes QC; Anesta sits as a recorder and part-time chairperson of employment tribunals, and she was in fact counsel to the Lawrence Inquiry. As you know, we have been asked by the Metropolitan Police Authority to conduct an independent inquiry into professional standards and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service. In our task, we have received a lot of evidence over the past few months, and some of it suggests that the MPS is not always sensitive in the way it manages its female officers and staff. That is why we wanted to get together a group of female staff and officers, so that we can hear direct what women in the Met have to say about their experience. Today will be relatively informal, and will enable us to have a conversation about the issues which concern women in the Metropolitan Police Service. We have therefore asked Operation Oakley, the Metropolitan Police Federation, the Met trade unions and indeed the Metropolitan Black Police Officers Association to arrange your attendance here today, and let me, right at this point, record our gratitude for their co-operation, and indeed their assistance. As you can see from the notes on your seats, we want to hear from you on a whole range of issues, but I would like to emphasise that we are not just interested in what is wrong with the Met, we are equally interested in what is right with it, and we are particularly keen to hear your suggestions as to how to make things better. Although we are a public inquiry, we have decided to conduct this hearing in private, the reason being that we want you to feel comfortable, to answer our questions, to tell us what you think, and indeed to do so without an audience from the Met, or from the media, or indeed anyone else. I hope you find these arrangements helpful, and that you feel confident to speak freely with us this morning. However, as I have said, we are a public inquiry, and we are obliged to operate in as open and transparent a way as possible. As a result, we will be publishing the transcript of this morning's session on our website in the next few days, but we will only do so after we have taken all steps to remove any reference to your names or other personal details, in order to be sure that it contains no information that identifies any individuals. Before I begin, I want to say a word about how I intend to conduct this morning's session. I want to listen, I want to learn, and I want to hear your experience. And so we hope this event will be a more conversational format, a discussion rather than questions and answers. As I have already said, we want it to be informal, and in essence, to have that two-way conversation, and this is a hope that my colleagues and I both share. To help this process, as you will see, we have circulated a list of topics for discussion, on which we want your views. I will chair the discussion, and lead on one or two of the earlier topics as listed. The remainder will be divided between Miss Weekes and Sir Anthony. Despite the list, we do genuinely want to feel that you have had every opportunity in telling us anything which is relevant to your work that will help us in our task, which is to conduct this public inquiry. Two members of our support team will be available with a roving microphone, so that we can hear, and everyone can hear, what is being said. We would therefore be very grateful if you would wait to begin your contribution until one of the members of our support team reaches you with the microphone, at which point giving your name and identifying your areas of work would indeed be helpful. If you are an officer, your name and rank and title would also be extremely helpful. But I repeat again, any identification by name or areas of work which might identify you through rank will be removed before we post on our website the areas that we discuss this morning. So at this point, I think that it would be appropriate if I just pause and see whether there are any comments on the way that I have just outlined that we want to conduct this session this morning. Feel free to comment, say whatever you wish, and, if you do raise any points, then I promise it will be properly and constructively considered. (Pause). Okay, it seems that we are all content so far. Let me just say again, if you do not want to give your name, then we are comfortable; if you do, then at least we can have a conversation, rather than me just pointing and saying "sister", I can use a name which, for me, is more personal. Could I just say to you that we have received a lot of evidence over the last 12 weeks or so, on a whole range of issues. We have talked about some of the work/life balance issues, the diversity issues, the Fairness at Work issues. But I think that what we want to hear is what you see, as women in the Metropolitan Police Service, officers and staff, what you see as the big issues for you that would make a difference to your working life, if we can sort of just start there. If you had one thing that would make a real difference to the quality of your working life, what would that be? I see a hand at the back. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] officer at [Redacted]. My main thing is being part-time; if I could be taken a bit more seriously than I am, it would be quite pleasant. It is quite a big issue really. I am not taken seriously by anybody at work. All my colleagues – when I go into work, they say, "Are you still part-time?", every single time I go into work, I am absolutely sick of it. And my senior management as well, I find it really difficult. I have tried to do flexible working, it has taken ten months to get my shift pattern sorted out, which I think is totally unacceptable. It has been very difficult, they have pushed me, they have batted me from pillar to post, they have put me on various different teams, to try and sort of, effectively, get rid of me, that is what it felt like, and eventually, ten months later, when I asked for a written reason why they were turning it down, they said they were not turning it down, they lost the file, and they finally came up with a shift pattern, but it took them ten months, which is not acceptable. Sir William Morris: I am assuming you have got caring responsibilities? Speaker: I have a [Redacted] year old and a [Redacted} year old. I work part-time, [Redacted] hours a week, and I share childcare with my husband who also works shifts. He is a [Redacted], so it is quite difficult to have two shift patterns, so that is why I have tried to do a flexible working pattern where I work the same days every week, but I do long days. It has been very difficult, and it still is very difficult, and I am just sick to the back teeth of it, to be honest with you. Sir William Morris: We have heard in our fieldwork of the police service in other parts of the country where there is a designated person, with the title of "childcare co-ordinator", and that person has the responsibility to try and do a matching up between operational needs and caring needs. It is reasonably formal within that particular service, but from what we have heard and listened to so far, it would appear that there is no sort of formal arrangement or reference point to help and assist. Speaker: The human resources department have been very helpful to me, but the problem I have found is that my management have absolutely no idea whatsoever what the policies are, not a clue, and nobody at the [Redacted] does. I am [Redacted]. I have had trouble ever since I have been there, because they do not know about pregnancy policies, maternity leave, things like that, they have not got a clue. Sir William Morris: Can I just ask whether that is a common experience? Yes, I am seeing a few nods. Can you just put your hand up if it is a common experience? Right, fairly common, I would say, about 10 per cent, there or thereabouts. But one of the words which underpin the concerns you have just expressed about the lack of sort of action is communication; it appears that the policies, whilst they exist, are not effectively communicated to the understanding of those who might need to access those policies. Can I just explore the difficulties around internal communication of policies within the Met? I know they have technology, there is the intranet, there are bulletins, and a whole raft of methods in communication, but, on the critical issue of policies which affect the individuals, officers and staff, could someone sort of just give us some commentary on that? Speaker: Sir, I actually work in [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in [Redacted], and I am also on the [Redacted]. When I was pregnant, it was like I suddenly worked for a whole entire new organisation, which was really scary. I know the policies, [Redacted] [Redacted], but I could not get it through to my line manager, which was the [Redacted] manager, the way I should be being dealt with, and how I should work, and my request to come back and work part-time – we have got clear policies on all those areas, I had to fight for everything. Two weeks before I went off on maternity leave, she told me that she thought the hours I wanted to work when I came back would not be suitable. I worked right up until my eighth month, and I had to fight to get a risk assessment done, it was not done properly, and in the end, I went and found myself an office on a lower floor, because I was climbing up 70 stairs every day to get to work. I work in [Redacted], and when I phoned up and spoke to central personnel policy, I spoke to a manager about what she wanted to do about my return to work, my hours, and they asked me what the name of the [Redacted] manager was; when I told them, he said, "Oh, she is a friend of mine", so you feel like there is no one there that you can ask. You need someone centrally, someone perhaps in management centrally, in personnel, human resources, that you can actually go to and get these problems aired and clarified, because at the moment, we have got a childcare co-ordinator, but she is very new in the post, and it is unique to women, and it is the one time that you are very vulnerable – you might wonder why I did not complain about the manager; that was the same manager who would have to agree my childcare times, and, like the previous lady, I am sharing childcare with my husband who works shifts, so it is very specific. I have to work those specific times to make it work for us. So it is very scary, you are very vulnerable, and there is no one central to go to, and I think in an organisation of our size, it should not be impossible for there to be somebody there. Sir William Morris: Thank you. Anyone else on this whole question of communication policy and practice? Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in the [Redacted]. I also work part-time, and have done so since I had my [Redacted], who is now [Redacted], and I have also found that there has been a complete change in attitude to a part-time worker in my department, and you are treated differently from a full-time worker. There are policies in place for people with caring responsibilities, but it is up – the unit which you work in has the option of adopting those policies or not, depending on their requirements. So you may have some units which are more progressive than others. I cannot say that I have found my unit to be particularly progressive, although there has been some introduction recently of flexible working hours, but there are other issues that they have not addressed, things like term-time working, which they do have in other areas, I know they have that in the Crown Prosecution Service; that has not been introduced. They do not have – they are very much against home working, although that was introduced for a very short time, but then was withdrawn. And a lot of policies which are sort of family friendly, which the Met as an organisation would say they are in favour of, the particular unit is not in favour of. Sir William Morris: Okay, thank you very much indeed. Speaker: I am [Redacted] from the [Redacted] . From my point of view, I am a manager, and where I found issues with the policies is where I have had to manage police officers. I am police staff, and I have had to manage police officers. You get automatically that undermining of your responsibilities as a manager, where police officers will say to you, "You do not understand the policies", even though it is quite clearly written out, and you can answer questions. Also, you can see it from the other viewpoint as well, where you have had police officers who are managers of police staff, who then just do not understand the policies at all, especially policies regarding part-time working, working from home. I have worked in an IT department, and we have got all of the technology that you could possibly have, with all the security implications and everything else, but the thought of working from home is just an absolute no-no. They will not even consider it. They just get paranoid regarding the security issues and things like that. But all you are doing working from home is maybe just dealing with annual reports, and things like that, you are not logging into the system in any shape or form. I think the policies themselves are just so open to personal interpretation, and that is where it all goes wrong, because each department says to themselves, "Well, we cannot implement them", and they are not always held accountable as to why they are not going to implement a particular policy. A number of years back, I wanted to work part-time – I foster, and that brings in a whole new ball game, because I am not physically giving birth to a child, then they all feel I should not have the same part-time rights and everything else, but I had to show them and prove to them that I am actually entitled to the same viewpoint as everybody else, and with the help 13 of a very good personnel manager, they told me, "Your department has to tell you why you cannot work part-time, not the other way round", so I did not have to prove it, they had to come back to me. But I had to be quite bullish about it all, in order to go through it, otherwise it would have been a case of, "Well, the organisation said no, so, no, you cannot do it", and I would have turned round and said to social services, "Well, actually I cannot do it". Sir William Morris: Anybody else on this question of communication? I see one. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] from [Redacted]. My main problem again is the fact that the senior staff at [Redacted] borough just seem to have no idea of the actual policies in place. I know many people in the organisation, they are usually detectives or police officers, who have had the same problem, and, because I have seen their fight, time and time again, I am now almost nervous to ask to go part-time. I am currently working full-time, and another [Redacted] in [Redacted] borough has been told there is no place for a part-time [Redacted] at [Redacted], so I know I am going to have a fight on my hands to go part-time, I have a Redacted] year old and an [Redacted] old with [Redacted], and I would very much like to do that. I know it is going to be a massive fight. The other problem we have is, if I am working 8.00-4.00 at the moment in the office, at any time during the day an arrest can come in and we would be expected to deal with the prisoner, which can take many hours. If an arrest comes in at 3.45, then I or another member of staff will have to deal with that prisoner and, of course, if I have to go home and look after the children, it is very difficult to find childcare at such short notice, and I could not have to deal with a prisoner for three weeks, and then suddenly, I could have to deal with one every single day, and there is no rhyme nor reason as to when that is going to happen, but there is nothing in place to allow me or anybody else to go home for childcare reasons if it does happen. Sir William Morris: There is a lady right at the very back. Speaker: My name is [Redacted] with [Redacted]. [Redacted] and one of the things they have really pushed for [Redacted] – especially females, is to be able to work term time. It has arisen a few times, and there has been only one occasion where they have allowed that PCSO to work term time. Most boroughs have actually said that they are not geared up for it, but they are pushing it for PCSOs. When I got on to HR central policy, they referred me to a site on the intranet. It has got one line, "Some people may require to work term time". Where is the information there? It does not help anybody. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], from the [Redacted] . Some of the issues we have with regards to policies, especially for junior members of staff, is that they are not actually aware of any policies. They know that, you know, we are following them in the guidelines and things like that, but actually accessing it, a lot of them do not know how to do it. Catering staff, a lot of them do not have access to the intranet, therefore they do not know anything about the organisation, much less about their policies. So when we actually speak to a lot of junior members of staff, we have to say, "Well, do you know that you are entitled to this? This is what this policy says", and they have no clue whatsoever. Then what managers do is that they blind them with knowledge, so what they will do is talk about a policy, and again, it will be their interpretation of what that policy is, and being a junior member of staff, you just take their word for it; you know, you just do not question, you do – there is a lot of staff that will take it as given, and therefore it will not be challenged. If you are challenged, then that is a different ball game altogether. Even as a first line manager, I have had that problem again. I mean, I am on maternity leave at the moment, so I am just wondering about this part-time now, listening to all of these other ladies, but I am in a position whereby, you know, I have not really got a job at the moment, because I just said that I am not going back to where I originally came from, because I was having so many problems there. Again, it is about how managers use that policy, because not only do they misinterpret it, they use it to harm people, and I do not say that loosely either, you know, we are talking about people's lives, people's careers, you know, how they progress, and it is all of that. It all goes down to, you know, how managers want to use policies, and the lack of knowledge from members of staff, and how to interpret it and how to access it as well. Sir William Morris: Thank you. Speaker: I am [Redacted] working in [Redacted] borough. Some time ago, I did part-time for a while, I have [Redacted] children, [Redacted] and [Redacted] now, but initially, I found there was a division regarding what department I was working in. When I worked with the [Redacted] department, the [Redacted] squad, there was actually no leeway at all for childcare, so much so that I ended up leaving that particular department, and asked to go back to [Redacted]. Since going to [Redacted], I was then able to go part-time, and then sort things out. I was very fortunate that I had a line manager who understood the problems, the fact that he had a child who had problems, so he needed extra time himself, so he was very sympathetic to my situation. [Redacted]. Then I found – I had his backing, and my other supervisor's backing, but later on, when I applied for a driving course, being part-time, then that ugly situation raised its head; the opposition that I had regarding having the driving course whilst part-time was amazing, and I really had to assert myself in order to go through it, and the pressure on the course was amazing, because I knew I had to get through it first time. So I mean, now things are a hell of a lot better; I am a [Redacted], and I am able to now look after any officers who want to go part-time, I am very much trying to get myself in the position to know the policies. But without someone being sympathetic – and I mean, everyone has generally had an uphill battle. Sir William Morris: I will take another two contributions on this, and then move on, because I think the pattern is fairly well established in terms of the gap between the policy, the communication and – I will take this lady in the front here. Speaker: I am [Redacted], a [Redacted]. I have a lot of members who are part-time who complain that team meetings seem to be scheduled on days they are off, the minutes are not comprehensive enough for them to know what has gone on, management do not give feedback on their return to work, as to what has happened. And the other issue, a lot of staff who do not work in (inaudible) buildings base, sometimes there are not enough terminals – there are not enough e-mail terminals. Sometimes there will be one terminal and 30 staff, and those staff are expected to trawl through these long and detailed policies, sort of 15 minutes during their parade time, along with all their other colleagues. So sometimes, there is not the technology available, these staff are working out of the building from the time – after parade, they are straight out, they do not come back until the end of the day. Sir William Morris: Thanks very much. Speaker: [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] borough. I experienced problems when I had my [Redacted] child, and wanted to go part-time, and also wanted to breast feed my child when I came back. That was seen as a major problem, and I was told that I was not allowed to breast feed after my baby was three months old. It ended up going to an industrial tribunal, and the policy – there is no policy which states that I cannot breast feed the baby. I also tried to find out exactly what duties I was able to carry out whilst breast feeding, whether I was allowed to come into contact with CS Gas, wear body armour, things like that. I never got any answers for that, and I have had two other women on my borough also wanting to breast feed their children who have also encountered the same problems. Sir William Morris: Thank you. Well, as I have indicated, there are a lot of common strands in respect of the whole question of part-time, and people with caring responsibilities, so I think we have got a fair picture there. I just want to move on with one more issue before I invite my colleagues to come in. One of the issues which emerged in our evidence so far, it is a question of the culture, the culture can manifest itself in many ways, but for the purpose of this exercise, it is a sort of gender issue. The best way I can describe the culture, as it has been conveyed to us, is a sort of lads' and dads' culture, the boys' culture, and, from that point of view, the female officers and staff find it difficult to get a hearing in a very constructive way, because the expectation is that things are done this way, it has always been done this way, and if you have the sort of responsibilities that we have just been discussing, it is just bad luck for you, and it is not accommodating to the overall context of the gender requirement. Is that an unfair portrayal of the culture, or at least part of the culture, as you see it, or is that just somebody else's view or prejudice, from a gender perspective? Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in [Redacted], and I echo my colleague's thoughts earlier on; there are very few women in [Redacted], and it is very easy to become quite isolated. It is all the rules around communication as well, because I think, as communication has developed, in terms of technology, senior managers have become more remote from their staff and from the issues that affect their staff. In relation to the culture, my perception over the years is that female officers are really just in the "difficult" tray, and that, if you are a strong officer, or if you know where you want to go, or what you want to do, then you are bossy. Whereas, if you are a male, you would be a good, strong leader. I think that is still quite evident; that is my perception. Sir William Morris: Anybody else? Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] on the [Redacted] in the [Redacted]. You may or may not be aware that 50 per cent of our staff are women, so we are one of the OCUs that actually has a lot of part-time female workers. I would say that, as a manager on a team, it is a strategic problem for myself, because we are not given an augmentation of staff to cope with the fact that, because we have 50 per cent women, we have restricted duties, maternity and part-time working as issues to deal with, when we are trying to investigate a serious crime [Redacted]. So from my perspective, it is a strategic issue that particularly those OCUs that attract women, like [Redacted] and perhaps the DPS, they are not given the support of an augmentation of staffing levels. Sir William Morris: I take your point. Speaker: My name is [Redacted] from the [Redacted and my main area is around [Redacted], but in the previous part of my career, for [Redacted] years, I served on the [Redacted] and I would say, in any department that I have ever been aware of, there is a lads' and dads' culture there, and there is a certain amount of assimilation that has to take place in order to survive that environment. Childcare issues – I have moved on from there since then, and it is a good ten years since then, but I would hazard a guess that things have not improved as much as they could do, particularly in an area like that. It also relates to – in terms of the physical nature of the job; if you are a mother, you are breast feeding, shield training is not going to help you, it is not going to be very helpful. Already a female officer on the [Redacted] has lost her life because of inappropriate equipment. So I would say probably one of those areas that seriously needs a focus is an area like that, where you are particularly proactive; there is an indentured lads' and dads' – or a lads' culture. Sir William Morris: First of all, the management must be aware of this, this sort of culture, the lads' and dads' culture. What can be done to break it down? Or is it so pervasive that it cannot be broken down? Speaker: My name is [Redacted], and I am from [Redacted] at the moment. I must say, with the childcare issues, we have [Redacted] WPCs, if I can call them that, who have gone part-time, and, as far as I am aware, talking in the locker room, they have got 100 per cent backing from [Redacted] senior management. They have come forward with working timetables which fit in with their partners, who are also on the [Redacted]. I believe it does have some respect to do with the fact that senior management want to progress, so they want to take that role on, and prove that they can leave [Redacted], having brought in the female flexibility system with childcare issues. Like my colleague said behind me, there is still very much a lads' and dads' environment, and if you are not a strong person, a strong character and a strong female officer of any kind, then you will not survive there. I think every day you go to work, you know you are going and it is going to be a battle – not, I think, from a chauvinistic side, I do not think the males within the [Redacted] appreciate what you feel as a female officer. It is naivety, and the one way we all describe it, as females on the [Redacted], is we would like to put one male officer in a carrier full of eight WPCs and see how they feel, see if they feel intimidated, see if they feel some of the conversations that go on, you know, some of the times you feel excluded, how that approach is. I think sometimes, if that was to happen, they would back off and they would realise – I think it is just naivety on their behalf. Sir William Morris: I will take a point in the front here, and then hand over to Miss Weekes. Speaker: Can I just make one point, in the interests of fairness, which I think is very important here? My name is [Redacted], I am from the [Redacted] in [Redacted]. You have obviously asked this question before in your Inquiry; this is just a point of fairness, I have worked in three forces now, including the [Redacted], the Met being my third and final force, and I have worked in [Redacted] departments for a long time now. I have obviously been very, very lucky, and I have not encountered some of the things that the other ladies are talking about here. I have not seen that either, and I would just like the Inquiry to take note that, in the interests of fairness, that is not what is going on 100 per cent. I do not dispute anything that is going on. I would just like that point made with the Inquiry, because I think it is very important, and it is a very easy accusation to point at the police force, that there is a lads' and dads' culture and, having recently come from the [Redacted], as other officers here have come from, that is one that is perceived to be very much male orientated, and I am sure there are other women in this room that could probably support me and say when you actually get there, the story is very, very different. Sir William Morris: Fair point, but we have heard quite a bit of evidence on the lads' and dads' – that is why we have returned to it, looking for the fairness and the balance, but I take your point. Speaker: I am [Redacted], based at the [Redacted] , I am also an active [Redacted]. Within the [Redacted], I am one of [Redacted] females, and I am the only black female out of [Redacted] officers. We currently assist [Redacted], and last year, they have certain accommodations where you can either be there – with regards to, like, say, refreshments, as an example, you will have full board. At a particular accommodation based in [Redacted], it is only for males. They have, for example, [Redacted] accommodations, and a lot of officers go up to assist at [Redacted] because they get an allowance or they get a cheque, in advance, which can work out to be quite a lot of money over a six-week to eight-week period, whereas, as a female, I am not given that opportunity. Another example is we had one female motorcyclist in [Redacted], all the guys had their locker rooms downstairs in the basement, where all the bikes are; she was the only female out of [Redacted] officers, and her locker room was up on the third floor. Many was the time I have had to give her a hand to get all her things taken downstairs, her helmet and all her biker's gear. She has spoken a million times about getting lockers, and it still has not been done. Now she has left [Redacted], she has gone to [Redacted]. She had a better career offer, plus I think she got fed up with some of the issues that are currently on [Redacted]. Not on all the branches – you know, the MPS, that, you know, you say about "lads and dads", but it very much is in some of the specialist groups, and especially on [Redacted]. Another example is we had set up a women's group within the [Redacted], and, out of six females, four of us have endured porno being played on night duty on some of – because we have a club facility where they have, like, all the channels, like Sky and all the other channels, because we have two hours down time and we had to sit and sometimes endure porno being played, very insensitive. I mean, I am one of only – one female that sits in about ten men in a room, and it is very intimidating. Obviously, we do have a very, very long way to go. Sir William Morris: Okay. I will ask Miss Weekes to pick up the discussion. Miss Weekes: Thank you very much. Can I come back to part-time flexi-working, because I think it would be regrettable to lose the opportunity to draw out from your experience and expertise at understanding policies, as to the remedies, the way forward, and I take on board one of the comments being made, that that may not be the Met in its entirety; I am not so sure that matters. There have been at least ten contributions from this audience that indicates regularly there are unlawful actions being committed by management, and that women are being treated badly, inappropriately and unlawfully. Even if it is only ten, it is worth this discussion. Of course, it may be terribly negative just to leave it there, because we obviously want to assist as best we can, so I would like contributions now, not around the problem, because it is crystal clear and dramatic as to what the problem is, but where do we go from here? I just want to ask this: is this the first forum that you have had recently where you have been able to talk openly and frankly about the problems? The first one ever. Well, first of all, I wonder why it should be the first one ever. We have some contributions. Speaker: Sorry, second time. At [Redacted], where I come from, we have meetings twice monthly, just females, which is exactly the same style as this. Any problems that we have are addressed, and obviously minutes are taken, and that gets put to senior management. If they cannot come back with a result, an answer, or an objective view in relation to what we have commented on, then that again gets dealt with, and it goes higher and higher until – you know, if that person is not happy with the result that has come back, for whatever reason, they can continue to pursue the issue, but we do have it every two months, and it is common knowledge, across all of the [Redacted], that, whatever your duty commitments are, you will be released in order to attend that meeting. It is only if you personally choose that you do not want to go that time that you do not go; you will be released, whatever your tour of duty. Miss Weekes: Well, that is an example of good practice, thank you for that. Speaker: Good morning, I am [Redacted] , I am from the [Redacted]. I think it is an endemic problem across the service, it is an issue that has always been too difficult to deal with, and it is an issue that managers like to refer you to policy, and you have to go and deal with that policy yourself. One of the main problems is there is nowhere for people to go; there is not a point of reference where you know that somebody will pick up the telephone and answer your problem, and this is not just about this issue, this is about so many issues in the police service as a whole, which affect males as well as females, affect white members of staff and black members of staff. The whole problem is leadership and knowledge, and it is right across the board, and whether we have promoted the wrong people, or we have selected the wrong types of characters in post, but I would take a guess that the majority of people sat in this room have a problem with their line managers, as a result of promoting the wrong people, and I think that is where we have got to look at. We have got to look at the management level which is not trained, is not knowledgeable enough, and are frightened of making decisions; really frightened of making decisions, especially when it comes to women, and being strong, either for or against the situation, but actually just putting it in the "too difficult" tray, and I truly believe that is a massive issue within the police service at the moment. Miss Weekes: Can I again come back to what we think the solution should be? I made a note that actually the problem is from one extreme to the other: in summary, just taking the childcare issues and part-time, and I think it is very important to realise that men also have these problems with middle management, people are genuinely not aware of the policies. They do know about them, but they misinterpret them. They do not care. It is open to personal interpretation to suit the manager. People choose whether they have them or not; now I think that is a summary of what you have all said. Speaker: Could I just add one more that I have come across frequently? I am from the [Redacted], I am a [Redacted]. And that is our management, over many, many years, have always tried to take the easy option out, whether it is right or wrong, they just have tried to sweep things under the carpet and take the easy option, so it means less work for them. Miss Weekes: Okay, well, thank you, that has added an easy option. Now none of those are satisfactory for women who clearly want to remain in the police force, which is why you have come to this forum, which is why you have not yet left, and it also does not protect you for statutes that are meant to protect you, because they are meant to protect anybody, whether they are male or female, for part-time work. Do you all think these are the options? I am only suggesting them because I expect I will be wrong, and then it will generate some discussions about where we go. Do you need a central person or persons, to whom, if your line manager does not understand, does not want to know, gets it wrong, you have an immediate line to go to? Can we talk about that as a possible option? What is wrong with it, what is right with it? Speaker: [Redacted] I would just like to say at this point, number one, is that we used to have a central system whereby policies were generated, but all that was devolved, and that is where the problem is now, because policies are actually open to personal interpretation. Sorry, I was just saying – I am relatively young in the service, I have only had [Redacted] years, but I do recall that policies were generated centrally before, and the problems have only just stemmed since it has been devolved at local level, which has subsequently – you know, you have got ineffective, inefficient line managers. Like you have just said, they are not aware of policies; if they are, they will have their own interpretation on those policies. I think, although the MPS is trying to gain corporacy, it is losing that somewhere, because of the inconsistency in decision-making, and that is from top level leadership going all the way down. In terms of the culture, you have only got to look at the management board, predominantly men; I mean, apart from [Redacted], I do not really know of any other women directors within the MPS. Miss Weekes: Okay, thank you for that. This is not my idea about a central person, it actually came from the women's representatives of the Federation, who themselves had some interesting things to say about their role on the Federation. It is on the transcript if you wish to read it, I am not going to repeat it in case I have got it wrong. But they said they wanted a champion, someone up there who will, for a change, listen to, collectively, all of you. Speaker: Sorry, the only thing with that is are we not negating the fact that you have a manager to manage you, and they should be trained properly, and they should know the policies and they should be able to assist you. I do agree that, through frustration, you do need that single point of contact, but why are we paying people in roles as managers, whether they be civilian or police officers, if they are not doing their job properly? Miss Weekes: Well, let me be a little bit more controversial. If you take it back to the line manager, why have not all of you lodged an employment tribunal claim for each of the managers that have refused or inaccurately, deliberately misinterpreted your part-time policies? Speaker: Can I answer that in one sweeping statement? I am generalising completely, and I do apologise for that, but women are looked – we are having this forum today because women are looked at differently with regard to the police service, that is why we are all here. If we then complain about the way we are being treated, we will just get looked at even more discriminatively – Miss Weekes: So what you are now saying is that is – that is a difficult option, because you are bringing a lot more problems on yourself. Speaker: It would be lovely. I personally had a problem getting a posting – it was nothing to do with being a woman at all. I challenged at a low level, not successful; challenged at a higher level, not successful; had feedback, "Do not do this any more, or you will get problems". Miss Weekes: Okay, that is one of the options. Speaker: And that was not as a woman, that is generally posting. Miss Weekes: And you would say you are quite strong, would you? Speaker: Definitely. Miss Weekes: Right. So it is not about strength. Speaker: No. Miss Weekes: Can we have a contribution from somebody we have not had yet? Speaker: [Redacted] I just despair, to be perfectly honest. I encountered part-time working – I was on the [Redacted]. [Redacted]. I tried to go part-time; before I went off on maternity leave I was told, "Yes, no problem, you can go part-time." While I was off I had a complete lack of communication. Two weeks before I was due to come back, "Oh no, there is a problem with you going part-time". It ended up with me having to do a lot of running round. The long and short of it was I got a sideways move out of proactive operations into a [Redacted] at [Redacted], so I am completely disillusioned. I thought of making a complaint. I am afraid there is an old school and a new school as far as complaints go, and I did not want to do that. I wanted to deal directly with a person. I spoke to the Federation, and I arranged a meeting with [Redacted], who is in charge of [Redacted], and also in charge of where I am now. I spoke to [Redacted] at length, and he was of the opinion, yes, I had been treated badly, and promises, promises, promises, everything will change, and ten months down the line, he said, "Oh yes, I am thinking of setting up a central point of contact, so someone specifically can deal with childcare issues, I will be in contact with you". That is ten months, nothing has happened, nothing has changed. I have produced evidence to him from detective superintendents that show that their reason for not taking me back part-time was the fact that it would put too much workload on other male officers. Miss Weekes: And that is an [Redacted]? Speaker: That is [Redacted], so what chance have we got? Miss Weekes: All right, well, you are depressing me even more. You do not want to go to court with your line managers. This central person, who could be [Redacted] appears to have let down one person in the audience. Where are we going? We have to leave here with a potential solution and way forward. I might sound very pushy, but I really would like to be a little bit more optimistic. [Redacted]: I am [Redacted], from the directorate of [Redacted], so you got to see a little bit of what goes on there. I am a [Redacted] , basically, and work within the [Redacted] room. Back in [Redacted], I actually applied for flexible working, which was new to anybody at the directorate of [Redacted], and was initially treated very, very badly by the [Redacted] there, so much so that I did put a complaint in against him, and, since that has all gone through, I have been allowed to do my flexible working, after meeting with the higher management there at the [Redacted], I was allowed to do exactly the shifts that I put in to do; I went from part-time back to full-time, just adding one extra day; I was 32 hours a week, and have gone back to 40 hours a week. So I was asking to actually work an extra day, which was turned down, and my reply was, "No, you are not doing it, because I say so". I challenged that, and I was verbally abused; not only was I verbally abused, but the two sergeants and my line manager, who supported my application, were also verbally abused by the [Redacted]. As I say, we did put in a complaint against him, he has since been disciplined and has been moved from the directorate, allowing me to return to work in a very happy environment. So it can sometimes work. Miss Weekes: I will come back. I am still keen to have a solution. What about a champion from your midst? What about somebody here who is prepared to take on this extraordinarily difficult role, and be protected by all of you? Can I have your contribution? Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am the [Redacted] I am so heartened to be here. Some of the stories are depressing, yes, but I would like to say to the Inquiry that the Metropolitan Police Service was never set up with women in mind, and in this, its 175th year, unless we start from that premise, all you will do, in terms of the stories that you hear, is go round in circles. We are in a phase of transition. We have been there, I suppose, for a long time. We have peaks and troughs with that transition. We have structures that are traditional; traditional structures have given us a traditional culture. Traditional culture has given us traditional responses. And we have people who are pushing at some of those structures, to try and change a culture. The staff associations have been at the forefront in trying to change some of the culture; Sir Bill talked earlier about a lads' and dads' culture. We know that exists, and many of us in this room have continued, and will continue, in the struggle to improve it. What we need is stronger leadership, what we need is leadership committed to an organisation that actually wants women, ethnic minority staff, disabled staff, and I am not convinced that we have that in the way that we could have it. We have people who give a commitment to it, we all know about boards, we know that many people tick boxes to move on to the next rank. There is an issue there with police officers as managers, and I know it is a generic statement, but that is part of the culture; if you are in there, you understand what I mean. There is also the issue about police staff; often police staff like myself come in from other organisations as managers. We are not police officers, we have an area of expertise, and we are looking to improve that area of expertise in terms of the organisation. Miss Weekes: I do not want to interrupt you, but that is an excellent summary of where we are at; how do we move it forward? What is your solution as a senior woman in the position you are? Speaker: Okay, in terms of the work that I have done, trying to support women and in turn engage men in the debate – because it is pointless us trying to struggle as women without recognising that men have a role to play in this. We have a strategy [Redacted] entitled "EnGender", it is a move on from the gender agenda, because the gender agenda failed to recognise that we have police staff as women, and we have a wider family, and we also need to engage men in that. The gender agenda has sought to look after – or tried to address some of the equal opportunities issues, to increase the number of women accessing training. It is now moving into phase two, and one of the things I would like to see is some kind of strategic forum set up that only focuses on gender, not focuses on other issues of equality. That forum would be directly responsible and accountable to the diversity board; we have a diversity forum, but that diversity forum looks at a range of things. There are a range of people – it is interesting to see people in here today who work on issues of gender, but almost in isolation. [Redacted] tries to co-ordinate and pull that together, but we have the same sorts of issues as any organisation, if you can find another one, the health service is probably the comparator, of 43,000 people – Miss Weekes: We have so many other contributions, could you just shorten – Speaker: Fine, there is a suggestion, a strategic forum. Management board is "man"-agement board. There is one woman there, de facto the Commissioner's staff officer, who tries to push women's issues on the board, but she is not a member of the management board. Strong leadership at the top, committed to these issues, which I think will come from the Morris Inquiry and external forces pushing the organisation to embrace some of the changes that you have already outlined. Miss Weekes: Can I just ask – I sense you would like to continue this discussion at this particular stage, is that right? Because, if people have other burning issues, I know that Sir Anthony Burden would like to come in, but I am actually rather anxious to get a bit more coherent idea of the solutions. Speaker: As well as my role as a [Redacted], I was a [Redacted] for two years, and I did gender as part of my portfolio, [Redacted]. I think it would be good to have something similar, and also, we have a [Redacted] first contact support, where, if some of our members have problems and they have gone through their Federation or union, they then come to us. Maybe setting up a centralised women's group, where there is a co-ordinator and further training given to some females who want to take part to give their added expertise and experiences – Miss Weekes: Are you confident that such a group would not be – I am being critical to be of assistance; if I am wrong, tell me. Are you confident that such a group would not be inward looking, that you will not go over the problems again, like you are doing today, in the absence of men, that you will not actually move the agenda to, "How do I deal with middle management?" Speaker: I think we have also got the issues, but there needs to be some awareness training of some sort to supervise, and some of the men who have been in the organisation, which is something that we are going to have to look at, to work with, because we have problems with the way we are perceived as females in employment and on childcare and everything else; we have to look at a solution for how we can address the men, how they see us in the organisation, which is, you know, something we have got to work with. Miss Weekes: A contribution at the back, and then at the front. There is obviously a need for women themselves to understand where they are going before they communicate with men; I have no difficulties with that. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] officer at [Redacted] and I am also a [Redacted] representative. We have 32 boroughs doing 32 different things, and numerous various autonomous departments interpreting the policies in their own way. I think whilst, on the one hand, it may be progress to have devolved to 32 boroughs and departments, because we now effectively have no corporacy, each borough and department is autonomous and corporate to itself; then within that, we have management of all levels interpreting policies in their own way; then, if we wish to be a corporate organisation, we are doomed to fail, because we have 32 plus, however many autonomous departments we have, doing their own thing in their own way, and it only comes home to roost for us as an organisation when it goes wrong, when it becomes high-profile, and we find we are doing our washing not quite internally any more. I would also be very concerned at the suggestion that we would be actively suggesting to people that we put in employment tribunals in order to deal with the problem. As a [Redacted] representative, yes, I would applaud this and it would make me very happy on one hand, but we have to deal with the people who are actually the subject of the employment tribunals. It is a big deal putting in a Fairness at Work; a Fairness at Work, in my opinion, is usually doomed to fail, because it is non-participatory unless the people wish to participate. They do not have to follow any of the outcomes that come. It is an academic exercise, so management can tick boxes and pretend they have listened. There is nothing between Fairness at Work and an employment tribunal. If a member of the police staff wishes to put in a complaint against a member of the police service who has done, in their opinion, some wrongdoing, the only way of doing it is a Fairness at Work – or if that does not meet their needs, a formal complaint against police, which is nearly impossible to achieve, and nor would most staff, in fairness, wish to do that. They just want a productive way of dealing with internal issues. That works, where everybody has confidence in, is open and transparent and happens in a non-threatening way. Miss Weekes: I hate to ask you, but what is it? What is the solution? If people do not want to take employment tribunals – and it is perfectly understandable why they will not – how do you deal with a manager who refuses to understand and incorporate part-time work? Speaker: You have a policy that deals with unfairness and complaints at work that is open, transparent and workable, and of which there is a seeable, clear sanction at the end: if you fail in your duty, this is what will happen. And if we had effective managers managing effective managers, then it would happen and people would say, "Hang on a minute, why are these people unhappy? You have failed in your duty as a manager". Why are the people unhappy? Because the manager above that manager has failed in their duty as a manager, because their concerns are not managerial, their concerns are about meeting the overarching needs of the organisation, which often forgets about the little people at the bottom, so if the managers do not manage effectively – and this organisation has appalling management, because they do not have the ability to manage. Speaker: [Redacted] again. Just going back to solutions, I mean, one of the things that the [Redacted] is recommending at the moment is a positive action programme for women which I understand the MPS has not undertaken as yet. I mean, the MPS, you know, in one of its statements says that it respects diversity, but all the evidence here shows that this is certainly not the case. I think a positive action programme would be very good in terms of motivating, valuing female employees within this organisation. Miss Weekes: Somebody mentioned sanctions; there is a contribution there and there. Go back to Fairness at Work, I am picking up on the contribution at the back of the room – go back to Fairness at Work and the ET claim. Let us have something in between that is more firm, that grips the problem. If the manager has not managed, let us think about some sanctions; well, what are the sanctions? What do you want, as women, to be the sanction if a manager has fundamentally failed over a policy that he should have been aware of, and because he has been trained, or she, should have understood? What do we mean by sanctions? I will come to you in a second. Speaker: Demotion, resignation. Miss Weekes: How many of you want to see that happening in the workplace? How many of you are prepared for that to happen? Well, I can see nods, but does anybody think that is a good idea? [Redacted]: It depends how severe the problem is, the situation. Miss Weekes: I have had a contribution in the front: it depends how severe the problem is. Speaker: Training is a big key issue, that is the main thing. There is no time set aside for training at the moment. You have got to be out there, you have got to do this, this commitment, that commitment, whereas senior management read through the policies coming out scan through it, "It does not apply to me at the moment" (inaudible) whereas if they have time set aside in their timetable, that day you will actually sit down and go through and try and understand it, and if you have not, then there is someone you can speak to, I think that is a main issue. They do not have the time to put into reading and understanding these policies. Miss Weekes: Well, can I ask this then? Would it help if there was a forum like this with managers, a compulsory one-day forum with managers, on flexi-time, part-time work, so you talk the whole thing through? Same Speaker: Yes, I think it would be educational for them, because then they could understand it. Speaker: [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] rep. I think what is needed is an audit trail for people requesting family-friendly policies; working, maternity leave, whatever. So when an individual puts a request into the personnel department, a copy of that request should automatically go to a central department. Now, if there are any problems in that, hopefully there is somebody who is taking an objective and detached view, and can come to an agreement, if there is an impasse at local level, because that is the problem our colleagues have said: in this devolved Met, there are not clear, concise instructions to managers, there is not a proper audit trail for individuals, and there is no actual practical way of complaining. Thank you. Miss Weekes: What about that as a suggestion? It is reasonably neutral, it does not involve the woman putting herself at risk and making herself vulnerable in front of her workmates, and this audit trail will be picked up by a central person who will co-ordinate between your – how many boroughs? 36. Could I just have a show of hands where we are with this debate? Does that help, that suggestion? (Pause). Okay, I think there were some other contributions, and I lost slightly the trail of where we were. Speaker: I spoke at the beginning, yes. Just while we are talking about this, something like a central office, as the lady was just saying, that we could perhaps apply to: if you wanted to go part-time or change your hours or something like that. It may be that two people are doing the same job, because your personnel department perhaps should be doing that, I am not sure, but for me, I know, if there was a central part-time workers' office somewhere that I could contact them and say, "I would like to change my hours, I want to do something different", whatever, they would fight my battles for me, because I have just had a constant, constant battle, and I am so sort of battle weary now that I cannot be bothered to fight any more, and if there was a central department – and perhaps they could also incorporate a pool of part-time jobs which were available, perhaps you could then apply to different jobs if you wanted to. It would be nice if there was a central co-ordinator, with people working on your behalf as a part-timer. Miss Weekes: So you do not mind that managers are now taken out of the loop for not managing this issue? Because that is what that suggestion suggests. Speaker: Thank you. I will not bore you too long, but a couple of things. As a manager, I feel very threatened by a lot of the suggestions being made within the forum that, if we do not know policy, we should get sacked or demoted. That scares me very much. Recently, I had an issue where a mother – I am not a mother, I am not part-time, so I have not got any of this, but I am very passionate about these issues, that is why I was asked to come – wanted a carer day. I read the carer day instruction in the policy one way, another colleague read it another way, and that is the problem, the policies are not clear. I think we have all talked about that already. But secondly, training; we do not want to sack people, we do not want to go to industrial tribunals. I would rather have a bit of training than get sacked, thank you very much, and that is what it comes down to: training. We need more training. A lot of the issues we are talking about today are not women issues, they are male and female issues, part-time, flexi-time, and women are getting bad press because we are looking at these issues from a woman's perspective. I used to work in [Redacted] borough and I am still part of their gender agenda, which is really progressive at the moment. It unfortunately has not got any males on the committee, but we are working on that – apart from the chair, who is very supportive. And we have now got together police staff, police officers, a maternity pack; we have a buddy system. You know, people who have gone through what you have gone through, you do not have to go to your line manager, you can go to the buddy. You are allocated a buddy, if you want one, when you have all these issues, part-time, maternity leave, for both police staff and police officers, and we have also got a central point of contact for part-time workers who want a job share. Why has it taken us this long in the Met to realise that if you want to go part-time, it should not be a big issue? You know, there should be a central point of contact, like we had in [Redacted], for the whole of the Met, where there are vacancies for job shares. The lady over there said she has not got a job at the moment, because she could not go back to where she worked; that is ridiculous, in today's society, she has not got a job, because where she worked could not facilitate what she wanted. Miss Weekes: So you should be able to go and download all the part-time jobs available through all the boroughs? Speaker: Absolutely, and all the departments. Miss Weekes: Who is going to do that? Speaker: Well, this is what we are talking about today. You keep saying to us you want solutions; I have been in the police service for 15 years now, and way before my time, we have never had solutions yet, so if you are expecting solutions from us today, I think you will be disappointed, but we will try and help. Miss Weekes: No, that is good enough. Speaker: I think there are champions within this forum who are passionate about this system, not just because we are women. I think that is a big point that we are missing here. Okay, breast feeding, yes, that is women. But most of the other issues are not a woman thing. Miss Weekes: It is a valid point. Speaker: I mean, I would ask, has a male forum been asked to be assembled for the Morris Inquiry? Miss Weekes: No. Speaker: Then we will go out there and they will say, "What have you done today, [Redacted], why have you not been at work?" "I have been at a female forum for the Morris Inquiry". That gives us bad press straight away. Miss Weekes: But I think you all understand why we felt we needed to do it. Do you all understand? Speaker: Absolutely, but this forum, which hopefully will set up the strategic point of contact, hopefully will not have any mention of specifically women's issues in it, but will be staffed by men and women, because if men do not realise the problems you have with breast feeding, and I do not, unfortunately, but I can imagine, then they cannot be expected to understand. Unless they are fathers, then how can they understand the issues? Speaker: Most of the leaders in our organisation are men. Speaker: Exactly, if the managers do not know, and the managers are men, then we are fighting a losing battle, but we should be positive. Miss Weekes: Just checking timing with the chairman, we have time just before our break for two more contributions. Those who have not spoken. Speaker: I am a [Redacted]. I do not know anything about care issues, but I have disabilities caused by an injury at work, and I would actually say it is not just about women, it is about the way – if you are a problem to the Met, they will do everything in their power to get rid of you. They will, you know, make everything so difficult. I have no role at the moment, I have just come back from a career break, and I have been told that it is too difficult to find me a meaningful role. So if you have an issue, whether it be – if you are a male officer, it applies to them as well: disabilities, childcare; if you are a problem – if you are not a robot, if you do not work 40 hours a week and do exactly what you are told, if you are not sitting in a little box as a pigeonhole, you are a nightmare, and they will do what they can to get rid of you, and to make your life as difficult as possible. It is not just about care issues. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], and I am a mere PC on the [Redacted]. I think we have got to change attitudes. It is the same as with race. We have got to change attitudes, it is the only way. I think the comment about sacking, demotion, that is one of the ways. Until it is a personal, individual, "It is my responsibility, I have made the decision that this person is not going to be treated fairly", it has got to go back to that person, and I think that is the only way you are going to change this job, because unfortunately, they cover themselves with the policy, "But it is the individual's decision", and it has to go back to them. Miss Weekes: We are going to break now, but it does not end there, we have got some more after the break. Sir William Morris: We have a break now, I think there is some coffee laid on, and can I suggest we resume at 12.00, please? 11.45 am (A short break) 12.00 pm Sir William Morris: Can I say welcome back? We want to maximise the time and the opportunity for us to have our conversation, so I will pass you straight over to Sir Anthony to raise one or two of the topics which are listed on the note previously circulated. Sir Anthony Burden: Well, Chairman, could I just, at the risk of upsetting somebody, I am just going to give a strategic assessment as I see the situation, having listened to what you have said this morning. And I am sorry, I think the issues that you have raised are so far off the radar screen in terms of the Metropolitan Police at the moment that something has to be done to actually raise the agenda at the very top of the organisation, because unless you have got the person at the top saying that your issues are important, you are going to get nowhere. Forums are okay, but they just turn into talking shops, and you know the culture of the Met, if it is a forum around women's issues, that will get labelled women's issues, and if you alienate male managers even more, then you set yourself back two stages, as opposed to taking the issue forward. So, you know, the traditional representative groups, it would seem to me, having heard the evidence, and I mean the Federation, are not promoting women's issues sufficiently, in terms of serving officers. Even the BPA, and I do accept everything you say, all the tremendous work you have done in creating women's forums – but the people at the top of the BPA are not putting women's issues at the forefront where they should be. I would just say this to you: if we could, as a panel, put a strong recommendation that said – because, I mean, as a group, you are so strong in numbers, police and police staff in the Met, that you really do warrant a seat at the top table, but if it is not going to come through the Federation or through the BPA or other representative groups, it has to come, I think, through a women's forum; be championed by somebody that is actually at that table, and saying to the Commissioner, "Family-friendly policies need to be properly promoted, and your female staff need to be valued, they need to be valued as such important contributors to policing London". Now, can I just ask you, as a collective group representing your colleagues, if that sort of thing – and that is only first thoughts, it needs to be polished, but if that could be done to raise the issue strategically, the macro issues, to actually get the message down to managers, male managers, many of them, "Look, what has been allowed to go on will not be condoned in any form, and family-friendly policies and related issues are so important to me as the head of this organisation, I am going to take a personal interest in what is going on", would you support that? I mean, is it something you would see as being valuable? And please, if it is not, say so. Speaker: [Redacted] again from [Redacted] operational support. There is a Commissioner's women's focus group that meets with the Commissioner. With the problems I had during my pregnancy, I e-mailed one of the representatives of that and I got back an e-mail saying, "Yes, this is something that is coming up quite commonly that we are being told about", so there is already some conduit to the Commissioner for women that is not very well-known about. I have not actually seen that it has done anything much, and there is also the new childcare co-ordinator, she sent out a questionnaire, and I responded to that, about the problems I had had with part-time working and childcare, and again, I got one back saying, "Yes, this is really coming up very commonly from women", which is obviously the same response you are getting here today, "and is it not really bad?" Well, yes, it is, and is it not time they did something about it? And now we have got a new Met HR system, where we can actually track centrally how many people in the OCUs are part-time, how many people are going off on maternity leave, so why can they not centrally look – and they could do breakdowns on what levels the part-timers are working at, whether they are on response teams, whether they are being made to take office jobs, which is something I have quite often heard, that operational police officers are shifted into admin. It should be able to get a picture of that at the centre, because they are being told, and getting it through various forums, and nothing is being done. As an organisation that likes statistics, they have got the capability now of actually finding that out from their Met HR data. Sir Anthony Burden: Forgive me again, but if it is going to the top and it is not being listened to, you are obviously a voice that has not got the clout at the moment to actually make people sit up and take notice, because if all it is being passed off as, "Oh, yes, some more statistics about dissatisfied members of staff", and it is just being pushed to one side, then we have got to try and do something to give you a strength of voice, and the co-ordination – maybe there needs to be – I mean, you are such a disparate organisation, 32 boroughs, numerous specialist departments, that it is difficult, I do appreciate, for you to get a voice that says, "Look, this is a voice of female staff within the Metropolitan Police, not just individuals within it", and I just wonder, you know – Speaker: I mean, it is in existence, the Commissioner's women's focus group, but previously to this year, they would not have been able to get that statistical information from Met HR, because PIMS was not set up like that. This is a Met-wide system, and they can get information from it, so maybe they should be. Speaker: I just wondered if there is an ACPO responsibility for women's issues, because this whole issue cannot solely be attributed to the Metropolitan Police Service, it must be right across the UK, and surely that is a line that needs to be maybe tapped into, I am not sure whether that ACPO officer is a Metropolitan Police officer, but if that is in existence already, perhaps that can be expanded on. Sir Anthony Burden: And we have visited police services that are doing much better for women staff, let me say, but I do not think as a leader of an organisation, an ex-leader of an organisation, you can abdicate your responsibilities for actually managing your people. Same Speaker: Perhaps we can learn from – Sir Anthony Burden: Yes, I think absolutely. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], and the Commissioner's women's group did report to management board early this month, DAC Carol Howlett reported, but even there, there are additional issues for VEM women which have not been raised. One PC who is VEM pointed out that in her experience, there is a hierarchy in the workplace: White male, white female, VEM male and VEM female. Now the Commissioner has heard this first hand, so it will be interesting to see what happens, because, later on, in the same meeting, he said he is meeting with about 30 or 40 senior police staff later on. It will be interesting to see the composition of that group, because there will be white women in that group, but how many VEM males or females? It will be interesting to see. And slightly off the point, at management board again, somebody pointed out that middle management are the most difficult people to get through to. Recommendations from the Lawrence Inquiry – they will observe perhaps certain policies, but they do not seem to be committed to it, and this comes across when something like the Secret Policeman is shown on television, and the discussions that take place, conversations that take place, show that middle managers who do not have to be seen to be taking action do not take something like that seriously, whereas senior management, who have to be seen to take action, will say the right things. Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you. Speaker: It is just a question I want to ask really. In your opening statement you talked about family-focused mechanisms. What sort of context do you mean? Are you talking about all forms of family-focused mechanisms, because, as a female who has no children, I think that I should be entitled to apply for things like, for instance, part-time working, as much as my colleague who has got children. There should not be a choice between, "Can I allow this officer to work part-time because she has childcare concerns?", as opposed to, "Can I allow this officer to work part-time because she is studying something which will benefit the organisation?" There should not be that choice. That has been my experience, that there has been a balance – you know, we need to strike a fair balance as well, in terms of those who have other concerns, those who may need to utilise part-time working for other reasons, other than childcare, and I think that you are excluding then a certain other group as well, and marginalising another group. As one who speaks from the other side of the coin, I would like certainly to see all considerations around part-time working – I wholly accept that childcare issues are key, but I think that you should not then – managers should not be put in a position or certainly should not be making decisions on childcare versus another member of staff's reasons for going part-time. So in terms of – you know, you talk about family focus; this Inquiry should consider all formats of what a family entails, what a family means. Sir Anthony Burden: Sure. Can I assure you of that? It is about work/life balance, it is about the individual, about elderly care, about childcare, across the whole board. We do understand that, thank you. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] in the directorate of [Redacted] I think this issue is a question of winning hearts and minds, and I am not quite sure how we do that. Having a women's representative at management board would be certainly a start, because there is a major leadership issue surrounding all issues of flexible working which do not just apply to women, it applies to men as well, in my experience. But one of the factors that I think pervades through this organisation is that flexible working may be accepted at a certain level, but if a woman, for example, wishes to seek promotion, then it is pretty much the standard practice that you really – unless you are committed to full-time, then you are at a serious disadvantage. That is something that has not been addressed at senior level, and it is notable that senior women in the organisation – there are very few part-time senior women, and the message is: if you want to get on as a woman, then you have to adapt to the male macho culture that has always been predominant. Sir Anthony Burden: I mean, is that not what we are trying to break down? It is this macho culture, that you have to work 12 hours a day to be seen to contribute, and if you do not, then you know, that really is something which is frowned upon. The message needs to come down from on high, it seems to me, that says, "Come on, we are going to break this cycle and actually deliver work/life balance for staff, because we are all better employees if we have that work/life balance". Speaker: [Redacted] from the [Redacted] team on [Redacted]. Women in the police force have moved mountains in the last X amount of hundred years that we have been in the police force. My big concern here today is that by focusing directly on women, you are actually helping us move two steps backwards, which you have already mentioned. The two overriding issues that I have heard this morning are childcare and part-time working, which affect people's lives tremendously, but that is not just a women's problem. That is gender – and I know this is a women's forum, but my biggest fear is the more women's forums you make, you are just isolating us from all the hard work that we have put in for the last X amount of years. It is a massive problem, and I think, to me, the overriding thing here, it is a leadership problem, and there is a lady over there that mentioned the standard of the management and the supervision, and it is not just the Met; as I have said earlier, I speak from three different police forces. It is despicable. The standard is dreadful, and you are expecting very, very young in age officers and young in service officers to make people's life decisions, and to have an impact on that. That is not fair on the person that they are making the decision for, or helping; the responsibility on them is tremendous, and how – basically, if it all goes wrong, it is going to roll downhill, and it is going to come on that, and the service is not supporting those young officers that are supervisors. It is the gender thing that I think undoubtedly has got to be mentioned, and my biggest fear is that women are going to be isolated yet again. This is a gender problem, not just women. Sir Anthony Burden: We will take more hands up, but can I just throw this in? I would like you to tell me, please, or tell us how much you think a possible blame culture has an impact on this organisation, where supervisors are not willing to take risks and make decisions, for fear of being criticised themselves, and therefore they revert to the policies, as opposed to saying, "Well, you have got an individual problem, I am going to try and help you sort that problem out, and I am going to go one step further than the policy perhaps suggests, because it is important that you get that sort of leeway". Speaker: I am sorry, I came in a bit late, and I presume we are talking about life/work balances. I would just like to let you know of a situation I have got. My [Redacted] was diagnosed with [Redacted] last year, and I did not ask for any special leave or privileges. This year, I was told that my time management was bad, I owed no flexi-time – I am a flexi-worker. I owed no flexi-time, I owed no time whatsoever; I was given this list of dates. One day I worked 11 hours to get a case to court the next day – I am sorry, my name is [Redacted], and I am a civilian at [Redacted] That was a slap on the wrist. When I told both my EOs that both my [Redacted] were suffering [Redacted], they then made my time even more rigid by saying I had to be in at 8.00, take an hour's lunch, and leave at 4.00. I had no support whatsoever. They did actually say that I had not mentioned my [Redacted], but when they did know about that, that is when they put the rigid work times in place. I have had no support whatsoever; in fact, they have made me ill on the back of this, because not only – my [Redacted] [Redacted], so not only have I had to cope with that, I have had to cope with the constant phone calls and non-support of the Metropolitan Police. Now that, to me, is not a work/life balance. Sorry. Sir William Morris: Just to make one or two observations, because it is a very interesting discussion we are having, and we are seeing it from different perspectives; believe me, the issues that we are debating this morning are not exclusive to the Metropolitan Police Service, and therefore, whilst, when you break it down, what you are looking at are, if you like, the disproportionate impact of some negative policies on particular groups within the organisation, fundamentally, the start point is, in this instance – it is society's problem, because society is not getting the absolutely full and total contribution from a large part of its citizens, the workforce. But setting aside that broader macro issue, it is the organisation's problem, the institution which is deficient in not getting the full and total contribution from its investment, its people, the most important resource, is the organisation, the Metropolitan Police Service, and that is where the thing starts. So it is not about men and women, it is about the organisation, full stop. And that leads into exactly what you say, Tony, that it demands leadership, it demands absolute total example, because you have to develop the culture within the organisation, and the people within the organisation need to know precisely what are its values and what are the expectations. Now where I perhaps take a slightly different view in terms of how you break down the issues from a gender perspective, I take the view that the victims of any discrimination, whether it is gender, race, sexuality, disability or whatever, the victims must have a contribution to make in devising the solution. The victims must speak for themselves. It is about empowerment, and it is about giving them a voice. You know, you can go back and say that if you had left it to the whites in South Africa, South Africa would still have apartheid today; you had to bring in the victims of discrimination in South Africa to fight for the solution. So let me just share this with you: fundamentally, at the end of the day, people are making decisions and they are exercising power, and those who have power do not give it up voluntarily. It has to be fought for, argued for, it has to be challenged, to get power. But the way that the argument has to be presented – not on the basis of an individual, and I accept the fact that if I have childcare requirements or granny care requirements, or whatever it is, it is a problem for me, in essence, but, in the end, we have to put the argument forward that the organisation is deficient, and it is not sort of delivering of its best, it is not maximising its investment and the potential of its people, because it has got a certain deficiency in the policies. So that is basically where we are coming from, and in the end, you have to say, "Right, this is why you have these support groups. Okay, you have got gender, you have got race, you have got disability, you have got sexuality, you determine your solutions to contribute, but then you have to bring those solutions back to the top table for the common good". And I have always argued – in my organisation that I worked for previously, when I joined initially, they wanted to send me on a training course to learn about equality, and I said, "I am sorry, I am a victim here, I do not want to go on any training courses, it is the people who are carrying out the discrimination who have to go on the training course". So you are absolutely right, we have to have some forum for the men too, because the men in the Met are exercising the power, because there is far more of them than the women, and we have to let them understand that fundamentally, they are the ones who are contributing in holding the Met back from fulfilling its total potential and serving London as it should be served. So this is not a one-day debate, I have to tell you, it is fundamentally – what we are looking at here is to bring out as part of this debate, so that we can make some rational assessment, as to how we go back to the Met and say, "Look, you have got a problem here, you really need to start addressing it, and addressing it on the basis of the organisation's needs, because if you do not do that, then quite frankly you are missing out on a lot of the potential of the people that you are serving". So let us sort of just recognise those sort of realities, because that is how we have to address this issue, to make the long and lasting change that is necessary for this institution. Sorry about that. Speaker: I think whilst we have identified that there is a lads' culture, I think what is also coming out is there is a management culture which is weak, weak in communication, weak in leadership, and there is a serious problem in the Met with a lack of confidence within senior managers in the Metropolitan Police Service. Speaker: I totally agree, we do need a women's forum, and we do need to be heard. This organisation has been run by men for a number of years. What we need is for the Commissioner to actually say he takes on the issues of women. We have all of our flexible learning policies, we have all of these policies, but they do not have any teeth. If the Commissioner said, "I wholeheartedly support the issues that women are facing and all the other groups are facing", and then said to his managers underneath him, "Well actually, this is our policy, this is mandatory, there are no ifs, buts or maybes in it", then it goes down to the next level and then it will eventually come down to our line managers. I suffer from three strikes, being black, female and police staff, because, let us face it, being a police officer, you are wearing a uniform, you are representing the Metropolitan Police Service. Being a police staff, you are supporting the service, and on lots of occasions, we are an afterthought. The police officers are first, inquiries are about the police officers first, and then the police staff. We have to stop this, and have this fair policy right across the board, where we are talking about staff in general. It does not matter if you are a police officer or a police staff, it is fair across the board, and the Commissioner, as head of our organisation, needs to make that point straight. Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you very much. Speaker: I have a question, I am not sure if anyone will be able to answer. Do we know the percentage of male officers within the Metropolitan Police that are part-timers? Sir Anthony Burden: We have the statistics. Same Speaker: I just wonder – we are brought here to discuss that, but they obviously encounter – I personally know one officer who is husband and wife who are in the job, and the husband wants to go part-time, but has said it is easier for the lady to go part-time than for him. Not from prejudice, but he just says it is harder for him to face the corporation. I just think, if we worked as a team, men, women, everybody, and fought this resentment, if you like, to flexi-hours and part-time work, and got support in every angle from senior management in any decision we make, then we are going to go a lot further forward, instead of saying, "Well, men suffer it, but they can have their own forum; women suffer it, they can have their own forum". Let us get together, join them together, and fight it together, and bring everybody on board. I just feel at the moment, we are sitting here – we should have men here as well. They experience exactly what us girls think, women, females, and I think we should just unite and do it together, instead of keep alienating each other into different pockets, and I do think that senior management do need to be seen to support their staff, and if they do make wrong decisions, challenged as to why, instead of just brushing it under the carpet. Sir Anthony Burden: I think one of the suppressed statistics which would not be available, but we may be able to get it, because there are some plans to issue a questionnaire around this, is the suppressed demand for work/life balance policies. I do think, from what I have heard, that there are lots of people out there, male and female staff in the Metropolitan Police, that would ask if they did not feel it would be held against them for asking, or if there was a fair chance of getting it, they would probably ask. I do think there is a suppressed demand for this; I think all you see is the people that are brave enough to put their head above the parapet and continue to fight for it that actually get it. But no, I think the principles – Same Speaker: I think it is so important we work together. Sir Anthony Burden: Absolutely, and I do accept everything that has been said about labelling issues as, you know, women's issues or whatever they are, which creates even further divides, because we know how strong the culture is that you are working within, and that cannot be ignored if you are looking for success, and you must work within what you have got, I think. Speaker: Shall I just say my thing, as I have got the mike? Sir Anthony Burden: Once you have got the mike, you have got the power. Speaker: I was going to harp on yet again about this issue of women's issues. As my colleague over there said, only two things we have talked about today are women's issues; one of them breast feeding, clearly a woman's issue. The Commissioner has got a women's committee, and if anyone here is in it, then I would like to hear from them, because Operation Oakley and the Morris Inquiry have been set up since last October, and by the looks on your faces, you did not even know about the Commissioner's women's group. That is no criticism of yourselves, but we are here today and we have not got one representative from the only voice that women have, switching women issues, gender issues here again. But if that is the only forum to address a lot of these issues, surely someone should be here from that committee, and it has been set up for a few years now, and most people here did not know about it, yourselves did not know about it; we are talking about the whole gender issue. Nobody knows anything about it, nobody knows what is going on. That just says what the Commissioner's view is about these issues, whether it be applied to women or men or both. I just think the looks on your faces said it all really. Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you. Speaker: I just want to say something about the fact that middle managers are predominantly men and the issues around how women get promoted and the examination system and all those sorts of things. I think especially women who have caring responsibilities – the way in which OSPRE is constructed makes it incredibly difficult for women to go through the promotion process, and it is true that the further up the chain you get, the less likely you are to do part-time because of the pressures, so I think that needs looking at as well, the way in which we are promoted and how that actually affects women who have caring responsibility. Sir Anthony Burden: That is absolutely valid, and I think the point that Sir Bill made there reinforces what you are saying. If you have got a voice at the table, then those sorts of issues will actually determine and steer the way that promotion processes develop. If you are not there, that cannot be said. If the promotion processes remain in the hands of male officers and staff, you are never going to break through that ceiling. And I do understand what you are saying – please, I do understand what you are saying about labelling things, but sometimes the debate is so far back, you know, in the woods that you do need to start with basic building blocks. I do get a sense that the debate is that far back in some areas; depressingly, I do. Speaker: [Redacted], I am a [Redacted] borough. It is going back to the management issue. My colleagues over there were saying earlier there is a lot of great cynicism about the senior management in this organisation which – I have got [Redacted] years' service, that goes back certainly all my service, and way beyond. A lot of the problem is right at the top, how you go about selecting senior managers. It is common knowledge that above superintendent level, to get the next rank, you have got to tick certain boxes. You have got to develop a female member of staff, support ethnic minorities and so on. All these people are doing is they are ticking the box once and then moving on to the next one. They have no interest at all in personnel, they have only interest in gaining the next rank. I have seen that from two sides. One of my senior officers in my borough at my station who did support his troops, he was a male officer, who showed great support for his troops, and he got sideways moved, as a result of showing that support. Another even more senior officer, whose name I will not mention, is very good at paying lip service. He will promise you the world, he comes across as the most approachable man in the world. If you challenge him, if you lay down the gauntlet and try and pick up on what he has promised, he cannot deliver; and that is the problem. As Mr Morris said there, they are not willing to put their head above the parapet, because all they are concerned about is gaining the next rank, and perhaps that needs to be looked at, a better way of selecting senior managers. Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you. Speaker: [Redacted], it has come to a point whereby I can look on paper and tell you who is going to be selected even before they go for interview, so it is a matter of – the client has already chosen his person, but because of selection procedure, we have to go a certain way, and it is just getting completely ridiculous. Directors are being selected on the basis of what they see on paper and not having any other skills, especially people skills. I look at the criteria and all you see is how to, like, get strategic results, and not looking at the way they deal with people in the office or whatever, so that is a really big issue at the moment, but obviously there is no one to take responsibility, and once you say it to someone you work with, they just say, "Oh, just get on with it, that is the job you have to do". Sir Anthony Burden: So can I just test that? What you are saying is, reinforcing what the lady said over here, that it is what you put on your application form, so you can prove the competencies in key areas – Same Speaker: Definitely, yes. You can write pages and pages. I see them on a day-to-day basis, and it is just ridiculous. You see some women actually do apply, like for maybe a band A level, director level, and you just see them get brushed aside straight away, because they look at them and say, "Well, if this person has got childcare responsibilities, how is she going to work a 50-hour week? How is she going to be able to do the job that a man can do better?" It happens every day. Sir Anthony Burden: [Redacted]. Same Speaker: [Redacted]. Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you very much indeed. Speaker: My name is [Redacted], I work in the [Redacted] department for the [Redacted] directorate. The experience I have had is our HR managers are great at telling everybody else what they should be doing, great at promoting the family friendly, let us make sure all our employees are happy in their work, fantastic. When it comes to somebody in our department wanting to go part-time after [Redacted] wanted to come back part-time; facilitated that just about, only on the, "I want to do two days", "But we want you to do three days, so you can do three days". She then got pregnant again when she came back to work, fantastic, could not have been happier, but now, she has gone off on maternity leave again; the HR manager – "Well, is she going to come back? Is she going to take a career break? Can we convince her to take a career break, because that way we can fill her post?" The post that is vacant, I think it is a three-day-a-week post, she has now been moved to a different department without even being told she has been moved to a different department, because she is on maternity leave, so it does not matter. She does not know she has been moved, she is on maternity leave. So I have got an HR manager sitting there saying, "That person has to do this properly because policy says so", and yet, when it comes to our colleagues sitting in our office, "Oh, but we need that job done, we need it done on a full-time basis, it cannot be done on a part-time basis". There is no, "That person works three days a week, so we will employ somebody else to cover the other two days", it is just a case of, "We will write off that post because ...", you know, not – okay, there is five days' worth of work needs to be done in three days; when that person comes in for three days, they have got immense pressure on them to get the work done, so she comes in, and she feels like she has got five days of work to do in three days, cannot cope with it; she feels really bad, because she is letting us down. It is not her letting us down, it is us letting her down, but that is from an HR manager. Who am I to go and say, "You should not do that, that is naughty, policy does not say that"; I cannot. Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you. Speaker: Can I plead devil's advocate and say that also, being a woman in the job, that we are not always fairly helped out by our own female colleagues? I have a {Redacted] who has obviously done the lads' and dads' culture, and she will not accept if you have got a female problem. And it is not just myself, every female officer under her command has been to the Federation now. So we are not always supported by female officers, and we are not always helped by other officers, maybe female officers, to be rude, taking the mickey. That is a problem, and that is how it has been for the [Redacted] years I have been in the job. I have fought and fought, but if you are up against other women letting you down, we have to accept that is an issue, and female officers higher than myself are not helping at all, because they will not accept that females – they have taken on the male role, that is fine for them, but we all have points. Miss Weekes: I know there are hands up, but I would like to come in on an issue that is really burning for me, and it is not a woman's issue: selection of managers. We have heard some extremely depressing news from a large number of male officers and staff that bad managers are promoted or sidelined or moved to a cushy job. I can see lots of heads nodding. So I thought I wanted to bring up – because it was a point over here, and I did not want to lose it. The selection of managers, from my understanding, from what I have read so far, is linked to rank: the higher up you go, the more people you manage. You automatically become a manager by promotio