Annual Fitness Test

eroo

We've all seen a Garda who looks like he/she can barely manage to squeeze on the stab vest;we've all seen that Garda who looks like he/she can barely walk,let alone run,a mile.

Now I'm not being mean,nor am I poking fun!But I think physical fitness tends to be lacking with some Gardai.Obviously,shift work and irregular eating can take it's toll(as well as the pints!),but that shouldn't stop Gardai taking exercise.Now I know that most Gardai keep fit,especially the ones fresh out of Templemore.But would an annual fitness test push others in the same direction?The Defence Forces have one as it is paramount that a soldier is physically fit to carry out his/her duties.This applies to police officers just as much!Make the Physical Competency Test the annual fitness test for all personnel.OR,scrap the PCT altogether and introduce a fitness test similiar to that of the Defence Forces.If a Garda fails,they get another chance 6 months time.If they fail again,desk duties until they pass,as they would be deemed not fit for operational duties.

Could it work?If so,should an annual fitness test be introduced for AGS personnel?

opti76

depends .... would we get paid to train like the army?????

ie hour a day paid gym time

Marcus.Aurelius

You're suggesting a level of physical fitness for all members? Even those you are over 50 and work mostly in cars or behind desks anyway? Sorry, but that's just ridiculous, and an unnecessary strain on older members. The lads who walk the beat or work in Traffic hardly require a set minimum, and the older lads would never pass.

You can't have it easy enough for the over 50s and hard for the under 40s, it sounds like an operational nightmare to me! :eek:

metman

Joker wrote: »

The lads who walk the beat or work in Traffic hardly require a set minimum, and the older lads would never pass:

I couldn't disagree more. Where I work I expect people I work with to be able to look after themselves, me and the public if it kicks off. This usually entails a basic level of fitness. What use are you if you're not fit enough to save your own life, let alone someone else? You don't need to be able to run a marathon, but if you're doing frontline work you need a reasonable level of fitness for the one time someone's life, maybe your own, depends on it.

As for traffic, well again Traffic here are generally very proactive in tackling crime as well as enforcing traffic law, and as a result often wind up outnumbered and on the wrong end of a violent confrontation while waiting for local units to turn up. Again I'd suggest a reasonable level of fitness is common sense.

TheNog

I voted yes for annual fitness test 'cos we do need a minimum level of fitness. For the older members there could be a slightly lower level than the 20/30 yr olds.

However for that to happen there would need to be changes in the shift pattern though. I travel 2 hrs a day on top of the 8 hours which may not seem bad but for the changeovers which I find a killer plus I don;t have the time nor the energy to go to the gym.

In my last job I did 12 hr shifts but still had the time and energy to go to the gym while driving 3 hrs a day. Course I didn't see my family much those days but the longer days off were a gift.

eroo

Joker wrote: »

You're suggesting a level of physical fitness for all members? Even those you are over 50 and work mostly in cars or behind desks anyway? Sorry, but that's just ridiculous, and an unnecessary strain on older members. The lads who walk the beat or work in Traffic hardly require a set minimum, and the older lads would never pass.

You can't have it easy enough for the over 50s and hard for the under 40s, it sounds like an operational nightmare to me! :eek:

Being physically fit doesn't just benefit you on your job.Fitness training has countless benefits,of which I could fill an entire thread with.At the age of 50+ it is paramount you look after your health,mentally and physically.

As for paid gym time . . no Gardai wouldn't get it imo,getting fit shouldn't be seen as a chore,or another aspect of your job but as a way of getting healthier.Being physically fit may also come in handy in certain situations;whether running after some car thief who just jumped out of the car or trying to tackle some fella coked off his head.

Eru

Well too start with you have to consider the shifts, food and travel time. guys, finish at 10pm and back in again for 6am the next day with an hour travel each way, anyone going to the gym? I dont think so.

Then you have to consider that the army for a lot of their time only do training, they arent fighting wars on a daily basis and not all of them do over seas duties at all so its a bit like comparing a desk jockey to gym instructor. One has to make time to train while one is paid to do it for a living.

Firemen seem to be in good shape but then again, they are reactive, can sleep during their night duty and 1 member of the crew is deligated as the unit chef for the tour. He also uses food provided in their full kitchen to cook real meals. Again, someone with those allowances cannot be compared fairly to a police officer.

for older people, well you can say they could have a lower requirement but then the young guys would be taking discrimination cases and winning because if a 50 year old is fit enough by running the mile and a half in 20 minutes why are they failing with a faster time? (The run and times being an example only)

Should the desk jobs have to pass a test so they can continue to sit at a desk? Hardly more important for a Garda sitting at a desk than a civil servant or bank manager that sits at a desk is it?

What about members assigned light duty as a result of injuries? Maybe bad backs, arthritus or whatever? Your talking about taking their livelyhood away now.

Its a nice idea and if it could work I would be in favour of it because as said, being fit and healthy is a good thing both professionally and personally but its just not realistic without changes and allowances being made within the current organisation and system. Sadly I also agree with Eroo that there are lads out there that are heart attacks waiting too happen but you get that in the army and fire as well and I have met them.

Im also presuming Joker meant the beat men get enough exercise walking, running and dealing with criminals as it is.

dredre

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Firemen seem to be in good shape but then again, they are reactive, can sleep during their night duty and 1 member of the crew is deligated as the unit chef for the tour. He also uses food provided in their full kitchen to cook real meals. Again, someone with those allowances cannot be compared fairly to a police officer.

As well as cooking, the chef will be a part of the crew responding to calls. The food is paid for by the watch... not free.

deadwood

eroo wrote: »

We've all seen a Garda who looks like he/she can barely manage to squeeze on the stab vest;we've all seen that Garda who looks like he/she can barely walk,let alone run,a mile.

What are you talking about? The vest is holding me in!

I voted "other" as I think it's a good idea but unfeasable. Look how long it took them to train us to swing the asp.

the locust

Joker wrote: »

You're suggesting a level of physical fitness for all members? Even those you are over 50 and work mostly in cars or behind desks anyway? Sorry, but that's just ridiculous, and an unnecessary strain on older members. The lads who walk the beat or work in Traffic hardly require a set minimum, and the older lads would never pass.

You can't have it easy enough for the over 50s and hard for the under 40s, it sounds like an operational nightmare to me! :eek:

Do you think we should all conform to the 50 year old's age level of fitness?

I think if there were an annual fitness test, it would be straight forward, and that it would take into account different ages brackets - obviously

It only takes a moment to calculate BMI, age, health probs etc... and been given a simple run with push ups and situps or other fitness test.

This can be streamed to have the right people working in the right areas of the organisation

Fat gutted Gardai gaul me to no end. Like Metman said i would want who's with me to be reliable and there for me if i needed him, not wheezing and waddling back to the car saying "thats what patrol cars are there for!" BS!

Shift work? I know tons of members who attend the gym or play gaelic games and other sports regularly. Shift work is tough but there certainly is room for fitness. If anything it is a hell of a lot more healthier in terms of stress relief and unwinding from court and work.

I'm all in for annual fitness and i believe its on the way.

angelfire9

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Should the desk jobs have to pass a test so they can continue to sit at a desk? Hardly more important for a Garda sitting at a desk than a civil servant or bank manager that sits at a desk is it?

What about members assigned light duty as a result of injuries? Maybe bad backs, arthritus or whatever? Your talking about taking their livelyhood away now.

These are two very good reasons why i don't think this would work

A guy (like my hubby) who is on restricted duties as is having sustained on the job injuries would be out of a job if you expected him to be as fit as another uninjured colleague of the same age
(this is why the Garda Surgeon has put him on restricted duty)

As for the guys who sit at desks all day keeping the station ticking over while time slowly trickles towards retirement (and there is at least one of these in every station) you'd be condemning them to heart attacks if you asked them to jog one mile never mind anything else

There are loads of other reasons why i don't think this would work but that's 2 of the biggest concerns i'd have

TheNog

Ok so people on light duties would have to be excluded from the fitness test but I still feel that older members especially the overweight ones should have to slim down even over a certain period of time.

In reality with the problems suggested above a fitness test would have to rolled out over a period of time in order to take into account some of the older and unfit members and also to monitor and implement this change for x thousands of Gardai. As for desk jockeys well they could be exempt but the level of fitness should definitely be encouraged for all frontline Gardai.

By the way I am not a fit fella myself but if it were to come down to it I would if I had to.

the locust

I agree although it should be noted that people in office work, may not be in office work forever, quite often they return to operational duties.

I think the idea behind the annual fitness test is not so much that they pass a test, thousands wouldn't, but i think its more the psychological effect of a fitness test coming up, motivates members to be fit

eroo

A lot of you seem to think I was suuggesting that Gardai get fit so they can do their job better.Well there is that,but it can also add years to your life;lower stress levels;combat depression;and increase confidence in one's abilities and outlook.

In the Defence Forces they accomadate age levels by allowing people 50+ to a walk rather than run;push ups that are much easier on you physically.
Hre is the DF Annual Fitness Test.It could work with AGS(bar the 10k march)
http://62infantry.com/Annual_Fitness_Test.shtml

As for shift work,well I know of some Gardai who are immensely fit.However,I understand it can be immensely difficult to fit in fitness.Maybe allocate a large gym in each division HQ?Also,being fit and healthy could save your life.If you were injured on duty,your body would be able to cope better and heal faster as a result of being in good condition.
Finally,''a healthy mind dwells in a healthy body''

Eru

Dredre,
Your point changes nothing, its still a different scenario. When is a Garda going to be allocated this duty instead of the beat? Where will they cook said meal? How will everyone eat it as we go on breaks at different times and some dont get a designated break such as post duty.

Locast,
Your talking about BMI etc but then you need to factor in body builders, certain types of sports, medical conditions. I know a body builder who works in the DMR South, would never pass a BMI test but is in great shape. I also know a rugby player who is overweight but is still in good shape and in Templemore had too get certs from doctors and his trainers explaining his weight. What is you have a thyroid problem? Your weight can change significantly in a short space of time.

Now eroo and Met,
Your both suggesting that overweight is always bad but look at it this way. A 5ft 5in 9 stone bag of bones or a 6ft 2in 17 stone beast helping you with a violent prisoner?

What about a fat lad who plays sports but likes his grub compared to a guy that has no appetite but has never exercised in his life? I was faster and fitter than a lot of skinnier guys in Templemore simple because sport has always been a part of my life but so has food compared to these guys being tall skinny TV addicts.

And finally, remember the TV ad, the fatso isnt always the one with high blood pressure and cholesterol.

Oh, I almost forgot. We do have medical tests. You need to pass a test to go on a course such as the Car or bicycle course.

the locust

Thats a fair point about BMI, but a fitness test would have to take the individual's health into account - i agree - everyone is different.

Yeah larger members are great for sitting on the 'non compliants'

tintin

Joker wrote: »

You're suggesting a level of physical fitness for all members? Even those you are over 50 and work mostly in cars or behind desks anyway?

I would think that those assigned to car duty would especially need to be fit and healthy to do deal with emegencies. There is nothing more unprofessional looking than a guard who is as wide as he is tall and cant even tie up his stab vest...god knows, theres enough of them!

metman

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Now eroo and Met,
Your both suggesting that overweight is always bad but look at it this way. A 5ft 5in 9 stone bag of bones or a 6ft 2in 17 stone beast helping you with a violent prisoner?

The lame and lazy squad always make very compelling arguments against fitness tests or maintaining any level of fitness. Personally, as far as I'm concerned its a matter of professionalism. If you look like a bag of sh*t in yor uniform, you tend to get treated like that. Moreover, from an officer safety point of view a level of fitness is a life safer.

Look at the last thread I started, the Notting Hill kickoff. Say that had escalated to a full on Brixton Riots type scenario, suddenly the full time PO units are exhausted, and the part time PO units made up from the fitter members of local units are also run ragged. At this point, as happened during the Brixton riots, every copper available was handed a Nato helmet and shield and kicked out into the fray to keep the peace. It could happen tomorrow, here, or there. Try doing an 18 hour shift in a riot if you can't run from your locker room to your parade room. In all honesty what use are you to anyone?

Fitness should be a basic requirement in any disciplined service. So what if you're 50. So what if you sit at a desk. Either way if the wheel really comes off you may be obliged to assist a colleague getting a kicking or carry a shield in a riot. That's the nature of policing. I think some people get too comfy sat on their large asses doing admin work, and forget they're sworn officers.

Fyr.Fytr

I knew a detective, who at the time when the british embassy was attack and a riot ensued was called in, thing was he was that long out of uniform, he had to tie it closed with a piece of string!

Needless to say it was all hands of deck for that one, every hand to pick up the missiles fired at them to fire them back!

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Dredre,
Locast,
Your talking about BMI etc but then you need to factor in body builders, certain types of sports, medical conditions. I know a body builder who works in the DMR South, would never pass a BMI test but is in great shape. I also know a rugby player who is overweight but is still in good shape and in Templemore had too get certs from doctors and his trainers explaining his weight. What is you have a thyroid problem? Your weight can change significantly in a short space of time.
I understand about the BMI.But that wouldn't be a major factor in the fitness test,as long as it was obvious there BMI was sport related..
Now eroo and Met,
Your both suggesting that overweight is always bad but look at it this way. A 5ft 5in 9 stone bag of bones or a 6ft 2in 17 stone beast helping you with a violent prisoner?
Grand if he is a beast from lifting weights,rather than lifting Big Mac's to his mouth.
What about a fat lad who plays sports but likes his grub compared to a guy that has no appetite but has never exercised in his life? I was faster and fitter than a lot of skinnier guys in Templemore simple because sport has always been a part of my life but so has food compared to these guys being tall skinny TV addicts.
Then a fitness test shouldn't be a problem for him
And finally, remember the TV ad, the fatso isnt always the one with high blood pressure and cholesterol.
Yes,but most of the time he/she is.But they sure will suffer from back and knee pain!
Oh, I almost forgot. We do have medical tests. You need to pass a test to go on a course such as the Car or bicycle course.You can be deemed medically 'fit',and still not be able to run after some yob for a mile through fields

Karlitos,I think you are focusing too much on the BMI.A Garda's being 'overweight' could be accommodated for if it is sports related.Say that being fit isn't necessary to the POU's or ERU or Water Unit.Even the Air Support Unit Gardai have to be incredibly fit,so that they don't weigh too much,so as to avoid the helicopter being too heavy to fly safely.

Marcus.Aurelius

Be fair eroo, your username suggests you are in or are contemplating some work in the ERU. Its a totally different ballgame for that unit and the fitness levels are meaningless elsewhere in the job. If I can catch a cokehead, so what? He'll be out on the streets tomorrow after yet another benefit of the probation act!

It's all well and good suggesting fitness requirements, but it just doesn't hold water with senior members or members outside of the ERU and detective duties. I also agree with Karlito, I'd much prefer a guy with 16 stone of weight helping me out than a fitter skinny GAA head. Both would be preferrable to most of the girls any day I suppose. :pac:

Fyr.Fytr

A banner with a temper is something to be very very scared of, do not under any circumstances under estimate them joker!

Joker didnt you say your traffic? Catching coke head yea right, the real guards do that

*legs it*

eroo

Joker wrote: »

Be fair eroo, your username suggests you are in or are contemplating some work in the ERU. Its a totally different ballgame for that unit and the fitness levels are meaningless elsewhere in the job. If I can catch a cokehead, so what? He'll be out on the streets tomorrow after yet another benefit of the probation act!

It's all well and good suggesting fitness requirements, but it just doesn't hold water with senior members or members outside of the ERU and detective duties. I also agree with Karlito, I'd much prefer a guy with 16 stone of weight helping me out than a fitter skinny GAA head. Both would be preferrable to most of the girls any day I suppose. :pac:

Community Policing would be more to my liking actually!

Now now,don't be cynical!If you catch that cokehead,it stops him being free to bottle someone or get into fights.

It should hold water with them.It would not only boost public perception of AGS,but it could save lives and improve a Garda's performance in his/her duties.For example,running or any other forms of cardio can really help combat that sluggish/tired feeling.Although I've never experienced any 'zombie days',but being fit can keep you going that extra mile!

Marcus.Aurelius

Fyr.Fytr wrote: »

A banner with a temper is something to be very very scared of, do not under any circumstances under estimate them joker!

Joker didnt you say your traffic? Catching coke head yea right, the real guards do that

*legs it*

One of these days Fyr.Fytr! One of these days!

BAM!

Fyr.Fytr

Joker wrote: »

One of these days Fyr.Fytr! One of these days!

BAM!

Well see :rolleyes:

DRoyalSampler

I dont see anyone with a valid reason for a garda to not keep themselves fit, it should be mandatory and the physical tests they do in the first place is a joke. A lot of people see it as a cushy job. Its a joke they dont do physical exams at least every two years.

tintin

metman wrote: »

Personally, as far as I'm concerned its a matter of professionalism. If you look like a bag of sh*t in yor uniform, you tend to get treated like that. Moreover, from an officer safety point of view a level of fitness is a life safer.

Amen to that. From personal experience I've noticed that those who have let themselves go are the laziest in all aspects of the job. And anyways, with increased civilianisation, those desk jockeys may get out there best parade shoes and warm to the idea of walking the beat again!:eek:

Eru

Whats interesting here is that apart from Metman all the people complaining about the weight and current fitness test in AGS are civilians with no actual experience in either so no disrespect meant but I dont put much weight in your opinions (No pun intended)

As for the actual issue,
You will notice that were already seeing problems with a test even just in this thread. BMI can be explained away but are we concerned with how fit a person is or if they are within certain guidelines? Which is it? A perfect weight limit? BMI? Ability to run a certain distance? Or sprinting a certain speed in a certain time limit? Strenght? Height? Weight?

We have all shapes and sizes in the job, fat people, slim people, tall or short, strong and weak.

Who do we kick out? What ultimately are we trying to test and what guidelines and allowances will be included? Then factor in the various laws concerning equality and discrimination.


As for the original issue, well sorry Metman but Im as fit as the next man and just because I have a belly doesnt change that. No blood pressure, not obese, dont drink and have passed every test put in front of me, beating taller and skinnier guys along the way. Now I do hit the gym a bit, I participate in sports and I have a sex life (which rumour has it is a great way too get in shape). I also wonder how your body will react at 50 when you push it as much as you do now. SImple reality is your body at 50 cannot take what it can at 20 or 30 or even 40. Age effects everyone no matter what and telling a guy at 50 with 25 or 30 years service hes no good anymore because hes not as fit as you, well thats not realistic and a bit arrogant.

Like I said earlier I dont actually have a problem with being tested but if it was feasible not only would AGS do it but a lot of police forces would but they dont. They dont do it for a reason.

metman

Karl I'm not saying the Guards specifically should be fitness tested. I meant 'Police' generally. Of course at 50 you would have to work harder to match the fitness of a 20 year old, but that wasn't my point. My point was that regardless of whether there is a fitness test in place, which as you rightly say most forces don't have, for me a basic level of fitness is a matter of professionalism. I see too many unfit, obese cops who take zero exercise and it doesn't inspire confidence when my backup is struggling to get out of the response car.

As an example of what I'm talking about let me quote you a section from a book entitled Tactical Attitude: "According to studies published in Killed in the Line of Duty, it was not uncommon for offenders who killed law enforcement officers to evaluate the officers prior to committing to an assault. In one such case study an offender who had set out to kill an officer aborted an attack on the first officer he encountered after evaluating that officer. He then launched a successful attack on the next officer that he encountered after deciding that the second officer would be an easy target"

This is a common theme with those who attack and/or kill police.

Yes its difficult with shift work and I know from experience that you wind up eating crap food at strange hours of the day and night when on shift. However, too many people use that as an excuse for letting themselves go to hell. This is why I would be in favour of a fitness test. I put the effort into staying fit, so why shouldn't my colleagues?

My point is that complacency about fitness, or your officer safety skills might actually kill you, or me, if its my backup that just can't be bothered.

P.S if you fail a fitness test it doesn't mean you get sacked. You're instead put on an individual program to bring you up to the required standard, that's normally how it works.

Eru

Thats fair enough Met, Im not defending seriously unfit, obese guys and you make a valid point if they are so bad they cant perform their duties. Im just saying there are so many factors its not feasible and at the end of the day if someone lets themselves go isnt that their decision?

And the evaluation of an officer if memory served, was also about uniforms and a lot of factors besides being fat. I cant remember where but wasnt a study done on a force in America about assaults increasing when they changed their uniforms too be less threatening? Its in the book I think.

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Thats fair enough Met, Im not defending seriously unfit, obese guys and you make a valid point if they are so bad they cant perform their duties. Im just saying there are so many factors its not feasible and at the end of the day if someone lets themselves go isnt that their decision?

As regards how they be evaluated.Test their general fitness,you don't have to be an athlete.Just capable of responding well to a stressful,difficult job both physically(and just as important)mentally.Of course,I'm a 'civilian' who knows nothing of the job of a Garda,so therefore I cannot contribute my opinion,so as to help counter popular opinion on Gardai,such as that most Gardai live in Copper's or at deli counters(not too far off in some cases).
''at the end of the day if someone lets themselves go isnt that their decision?''Not if you are in a job where you encounter situations that put your life,your colleagues lives,and the lives of the public in danger.Is that not an accepted aspect of policing?

Tbh,I don't see why you have such opposition to fitness training and subsequent testing.What have individual Gardai got to lose by getting fit?Do you think AGS encourages Trainee's in Templemore to undertake physical training just for something to do?NO.It is because fitness training can improve performance in work,sport,family and yes,even sex life!PT can help lower stress;release chemicals in the brain that combat depression;lower risk of heart disease;improve lung capacity;improve cardiovascular ability;improve muscular strength and endurance;give you increased energy;allow for better sleeping patterns etc etc etc etc etc etc etc As well as making you look,and subsequently,feel better.So tell me why this should not be encouraged to every Garda?

Finally,with age you can indeed only do so much.However you can still do something.I'm not saying that a 50 year old Garda go out and do a 5000m every day,or take up powerlifting. . . Just to look after himself,for the benefit of his own health,his work and his family.

Eru

Correct eroo you are a civilian and therefore only have second hand information about policing. You cannot expect me too put the same faith in your opinion as a serving police officer.

As for what too test, well saying general fitness when I have asked about specific types of fitness and training is a cop out. Your saying general but is general testing only cardio ability? Is a police officer that can run 5 miles automatically a good police officer? Running is less important than mental abilities and upper body strenght. Neither of which is proven because you can run great distance. For that matter being a marathon runner doesnt mean you have a good sprint. Which is more important? The Gardai decided some time ago that chest and bicep measurements were not resulting in the best candidates, then the height limit was abandoned so now there are no physical specifications prior ro application. Now you need to pass a medical but that doesnt test your fitness levels in the first place.

As for an actual test, have said twice now I would support such an initiative should it be feasible but I dont believe it is as there are so many factors both in what to test and what allowances to give that the test would be watered down and queried beyond benefit.

Let me give you an example, in the old system you had to run a mile and a half. Men in 11.45 minutes and women in 15 (i think). Now what comes into this straight away, if a woman is fit enough by doing a time of say, 14 minutes then how can a man that did the same run in 12 minutes fail? he was faster at the end of the day. then it was changed and you have an obstacle course that doesnt just test your ability to run a decent distance (which is sweet FA use in reality) but your ability to combat scenarios similar to that experienced however the test is not equal as part of it is harder for small people than tall people so again, your into equality issues.

The point Im making is this, you cant seperate the 20 year olds from the 50 year olds. It makes no sense so either the 20 year olds are passing a test designed for 50 year olds which would not cause any problems or the 50 year is being pushed beyond their abilities and either fails and loses their jobs or drops dead.

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Correct eroo you are a civilian and therefore only have second hand information about policing. You cannot expect me too put the same faith in your opinion as a serving police officer.
And I most certainly don't.
As for what too test, well saying general fitness when I have asked about specific types of fitness and training is a cop out. Your saying general but is general testing only cardio ability? Is a police officer that can run 5 miles automatically a good police officer? Running is less important than mental abilities and upper body strenght. Neither of which is proven because you can run great distance. For that matter being a marathon runner doesnt mean you have a good sprint. Which is more important? The Gardai decided some time ago that chest and bicep measurements were not resulting in the best candidates, then the height limit was abandoned so now there are no physical specifications prior ro application. Now you need to pass a medical but that doesnt test your fitness levels in the first place.
A balance of both upper body strength and cardiovascular ability would be tested.Follow best practice.Test Gardai on push ups,sit ups,pull ups and leopard crawls.Then the push-pull test machine.That would represent upper body strength.As for cardiovascular,a 3.2k run,with times and grades matching those the DF AFT.If you can run 3.2k(2 miles) in less than 12 mins,you aren't going to have much trouble covering ground quickly.I know that from my own experiences of running,and of others experiences.
As for an actual test, have said twice now I would support such an initiative should it be feasible but I dont believe it is as there are so many factors both in what to test and what allowances to give that the test would be watered down and queried beyond benefit.

Let me give you an example, in the old system you had to run a mile and a half. Men in 11.45 minutes and women in 15 (i think). Now what comes into this straight away, if a woman is fit enough by doing a time of say, 14 minutes then how can a man that did the same run in 12 minutes fail? he was faster at the end of the day. then it was changed and you have an obstacle course that doesnt just test your ability to run a decent distance (which is sweet FA use in reality) but your ability to combat scenarios similar to that experienced however the test is not equal as part of it is harder for small people than tall people so again, your into equality issues.
Men have higher testosterone levels than women.That means men have greater muscle mass and strength than women.It also comes into cardio.That is why male sprinters world records for 100m are faster than womens.
SO,that is why men should be able to cover a set distance faster than women.That is not discrimination.
The point Im making is this, you cant seperate the 20 year olds from the 50 year olds. It makes no sense so either the 20 year olds are passing a test designed for 50 year olds which would not cause any problems or the 50 year is being pushed beyond their abilities and either fails and loses their jobs or drops dead.YES YOU CAN!I have said twice now that the test would be made up of grades,set at levels depending on age.The reason;50 y/o's are at a greater risk to health conditions than 20 y/o's,thus they cannot physically match a 20 y/o.Testosterone levels are at their highest in 18-30 y/o's so 50+ y/o's cannot be tested at that same level,as in most cases they would be out performed by their younger counterparts.

...

Eru

eroo,
Your not getting my point. If you set different requirements depending on sex and age that is discrimination. In fact thats pretty much the most common types. Didnt a woman win a case recently because her bank doesnt give loans to over 65's?

But anyway, we agree that its a good idea, we just dont agree on the details.

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

eroo,
Your not getting my point. If you set different requirements depending on sex and age that is discrimination. In fact thats pretty much the most common types. Didnt a woman win a case recently because her bank doesnt give loans to over 65's?

But anyway, we agree that its a good idea, we just dont agree on the details.

Well I just don't see how it can be seen as discrimination.Biologically,men should be able to out perform women.Also,at a younger age,you should be able to out perform those with quite a few years on you.I wouldn't see that as discrimination,just scientific fact.It works in the DF,and works in all armed forces/police forces throughout the world that do an AFT.

Yes we agree and disagree!:D

Eru

eroo wrote: »

Well I just don't see how it can be seen as discrimination.Biologically,men should be able to out perform women.Also,at a younger age,you should be able to out perform those with quite a few years on you.I wouldn't see that as discrimination,just scientific fact.It works in the DF,and works in all armed forces/police forces throughout the world that do an AFT.

Yes we agree and disagree!:D

'Unequal or unreasonable treatment of workers, whether through hiring or employment rules or through variation of the conditions of employment, because of sex, age, marital status, race, creed, union membership or other activities.'

'Any action, policy, or practice, including bias, stereotyping, and pupil harassment, which is detrimental to a person or group of persons and differentiates or distinguishes among persons, or which limits or denies a person or group of persons opportunities, privileges, roles or rewards based ...'
(http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&safe=off&defl=en&q=define:discrimination&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title)

The point being, sacking a male 30 year old who ran faster and was fitter overall than a 50 year old female is discrimination. The fact is he was fitter and better able for the job based on the test set but his age and sex determined the end result.

And just because no student Gardai or Defence forces have fought the various cases means nothing. The world is full of unlawfull activities that just havent been challenged yet. You will still be refused insurance by certain companies because your male under 25 with a zero no claims discount. In fact my partner was refused by 123.ie because she had a zero no claims discount but was acceptable based on age and sex. Force the subject and they have to quote you but whats the point?

In the past 3 years 2 large and often used laws that had been in effect for years were declared discrimination and unlawfull under the constitution despite thousands of people being convicted for them. Why? Because no one ever took a challenge against then until now.

Think about it, the most common option taken was 'Yes,I think it would improve the efficiency and image of the organisation '.

So now were dismissing staff because they dont improve the 'image' of AGS. They arent physically pleasing too the eye enough? the fact that they are excellent at their jobs is not the point abviously.

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

'Unequal or unreasonable treatment of workers, whether through hiring or employment rules or through variation of the conditions of employment, because of sex, age, marital status, race, creed, union membership or other activities.'

'Any action, policy, or practice, including bias, stereotyping, and pupil harassment, which is detrimental to a person or group of persons and differentiates or distinguishes among persons, or which limits or denies a person or group of persons opportunities, privileges, roles or rewards based ...'
(http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&safe=off&defl=en&q=define:discrimination&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title)

The point being, sacking a male 30 year old who ran faster and was fitter overall than a 50 year old female is discrimination. The fact is he was fitter and better able for the job based on the test set but his age and sex determined the end result.

And just because no student Gardai or Defence forces have fought the various cases means nothing. The world is full of unlawfull activities that just havent been challenged yet. You will still be refused insurance by certain companies because your male under 25 with a zero no claims discount. In fact my partner was refused by 123.ie because she had a zero no claims discount but was acceptable based on age and sex. Force the subject and they have to quote you but whats the point?

In the past 3 years 2 large and often used laws that had been in effect for years were declared discrimination and unlawfull under the constitution despite thousands of people being convicted for them. Why? Because no one ever took a challenge against then until now.

Think about it, the most common option taken was 'Yes,I think it would improve the efficiency and image of the organisation '.

So now were dismissing staff because they dont improve the 'image' of AGS. They arent physically pleasing too the eye enough? the fact that they are excellent at their jobs is not the point abviously.

It could be considered discrimination,but in the context it is determining someone's capability to carry out their job in physical terms with age and sex being deciding factors in each category due to scientific reasons,that are beyond anyones power.

Regarding 'image',I'm not saying ''make Gardai prettier on the eye''.If people know that Gardai have to keep fit,and they see that Gardai look fit,people would have more respect for Gardai imo.I can't stand it when I see some 40 something year old Garda,struggle to get out of the front passenger seat because he's 20 stone and can't fit on his stab vest.NOBODY likes to see that,because the general public(myself included) will think he is more of a liability on patrol,rather than reliable.

Also,would it not improve efficiency?If the individual Garda is in good physical condition,how can it not improve his/her work?

Frankly,I don't see how a Garda who suffers from back pain,knee pain and shortness of breath due to their weight is any way useful.Yes,they may have a vast amount of knowledge and experience but,imo,they can't be 'excellent' if they are at risk of keeling over from a heart attack at any moment.

If Gardai are fit,and they subsequently look it,they will be more capable of handling the bigger crims.Just look at regular uniform Gardai who make up the POU's.Do you think they could do their job without maintaining a high level of physical fitness?It cannot be said that their role is nothing like that of a regular patrol Garda.A Garda could encounter a serious public order situation at any time,correct?So why shouldn't that patrol Garda(regardless of age) maintain a satisfactory level of physical fitness?

Being physically fit can also make the body more resistant to,and better able to cope with,injury too.

Eru

Hate to delete a long post but I just realised were going in circles so forget my original post. We will just have to agree on the theory and disgaree on the application

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

I dont know how else to say it other than the way I have explained it before. 50 year old woman, 20 year old male. Man is fitter and faster but woman keeps her job over him yet cannot perform the job as well as he can. That makes sense from your fitness = ability to perform your job perspective? I have an issue with this. If your saying the fittest and best keep their jobs regardless of age, sex etc then the test is equal just not realistic. For example, I cannot run faster or longer than a female Olympian but does the fact that she is an Olympian mean I should get a job over her superior athletic abilities? Of course not, nore should she get the job based on sex. Men are naturally stronger than women but there is nothing stopping a woman from hitting the gym and physically becoming my superior. The fact that said woman chooses not to do so should not be too my disadvantage.

My point is that being physically fit can benefit anyone in their day to day tasks,a Garda being no different.Tbh,I'm confused after reading the above section of your post.Maybe I'm missing something?:o

Now your allowing personal opinion into the equation. Where does it stop? You think based on a quick visual examination that the officer is not competant however your placing a superior emphasis on a part of the job which too be honest, is only a small part and ignoring his abilities which shine.
He may shine in other areas,but what about the ones he doesn't.As metman stated,he'd rather have someone who can back him up in any situation

I agree it will improve his abilities, what I dont agree with is ignoring his abilities and sacking him based on a factor which may not be relevent to his function. I also dont agree with giving his job to a female that is weaker and slower simple because she is female.
Again,I never mentioned sacking anyone,just post them to desk bound duties until they can pass the test.As regards your last point,I agree.However I don't understand how that is relevant.

And that is why I dont place much emphasis in your opinion. Your clearing looking at one aspect of policing and only that aspect in the mistaken belief that the most important part of being a police officer is speed and strenght. All well and good chasing a catching said criminal but not so good if your a half dead ****wit that cant actually investigate or prosecute the case properly. Also not so good if your a body builder thats afraid of the sight of blood or gets scared stiff in a violent situation. Ever heard the term 'gently giant'? being big does not equal being good in a fight.
I'm not emphasising just one aspect of policing.Again,being fit means you aren't as tired or stiff as you would be usually after shift work.PT also relieves stress.This means PT could benefit the Garda at the front desk who has to deal with stressful situ's.It also helps a Garda who has to appear in court;again stress being a problem.PT could help alleviate this.It doesn't just make you better at running after scuts or tackling a coked up scrapper,it helps you deal with stress and also improves flexibility.


Public order units ARE normal patrol officers. For gods sake you think public order units sit around all week waiting for the call? Im on the bloody public order unit and Joker the traffic Sergeant may very well be too! That says it all about your knowledge on that subject. As for bigger crims, The General, Penguin and assorted other 'big crims' were big cowardly fat arses so how in hell do you make out that physical fitness would be better against them than your normal drunk Joe Public on a Saturday night?
Did I not state that regular uniform Gardai make up POU's?I did.I also know they don't sit around waiting for a call,they are all based at various stations.Once ye get the call ye go to district/regional HQ for gear?

Regarding 'big crims',I meant big as in built,not the likes of Mitchell or Cahill.

These would be the injuries that physically superior officers dont get because they are physically fitter? Besides all that as I have pointed out already, we have physical tests already and a doctor.
Minor injuries such as back problems,knee problems,joint stiffness etc aren't as common in those exercise regurarly.Obviously,you can be injured during PT too.If you are fit and healthy,your body can recover faster to any injury.
I also dont remember ever seeing an officer chasing and catching a criminal. Neither do I recall scenes of crime, computer crime or the hundred different office, research and investigation based Gardai chasing criminals.
Fair enough.
Ok, let me finish this off for good. The incompetant, fat or useless Gardai you talk about are either dead, in hospital, at a desk or retired through injury so if you see the fat Garda on patrol evidently he can and does catch and arrest criminals.Maybe.Maybe not.What about a townland like Listowel?It only has a handful of Gardai on duty at any time.One may be in terrible physical condition but still has to go on foot patrol because there numbers are so few.That doesn't mean he can and does catch and arrest criminals.

OK I think we'll agree to disagree mate,because my hand can't take anymore feckin' typing!The bottom line:we both agree on an AFT,as does most other people who voted.How about those who said no give us their view?Me and Karlitos have said more than enough!!:D

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Hate to delete a long post but I just realised were going in circles so forget my original post. We will just have to agree on the theory and disgaree on the application

Why in the name of God could you not have done that before I replied!?My hand is about to fall off!!:pac:

Fyr.Fytr

Stop making your excuses for a cramp you picked up during your special alone time :P

eroo

Fyr.Fytr wrote: »

Stop making your excuses for a cramp you picked up during your special alone time :P

Yes painting is a favourite past time of mine!:pac:

exbootie

eroo wrote: »

We've all seen a Garda who looks like he/she can barely manage to squeeze on the stab vest;we've all seen that Garda who looks like he/she can barely walk,let alone run,a mile.

Now I'm not being mean,nor am I poking fun!But I think physical fitness tends to be lacking with some Gardai.Obviously,shift work and irregular eating can take it's toll(as well as the pints!),but that shouldn't stop Gardai taking exercise.Now I know that most Gardai keep fit,especially the ones fresh out of Templemore.But would an annual fitness test push others in the same direction?The Defence Forces have one as it is paramount that a soldier is physically fit to carry out his/her duties.This applies to police officers just as much!Make the Physical Competency Test the annual fitness test for all personnel.OR,scrap the PCT altogether and introduce a fitness test similiar to that of the Defence Forces.If a Garda fails,they get another chance 6 months time.If they fail again,desk duties until they pass,as they would be deemed not fit for operational duties.

Could it work?If so,should an annual fitness test be introduced for AGS personnel?

Shocked that theres not already.

yesiam08

check out the fire brigade lads on www.dfbcalender.com
2008 especially... now they are keeping fit
no.8 on the right..mmmmmmmm lol

Eru

yesiam08 wrote: »

check out the fire brigade lads on www.dfbcalender.com
2008 especially... now they are keeping fit
no.8 on the right..mmmmmmmm lol

Not my cup of tea but the missus always appreciates a copy at Christmas. Usually manage to get one or two of the lads to sign it as well

AGS were denied permission to do a calender and not for the reasons people think!

eroo

Karlitosway1978 wrote: »

Not my cup of tea but the missus always appreciates a copy at Christmas. Usually manage to get one or two of the lads to sign it as well

AGS were denied permission to do a calender and not for the reasons people think!

''Mr.December: Gda. Jeremiah O' Shaughnessy, from Ballybollock, Co. Meath''

:pac:

Eru

eroo wrote: »

''Mr.December: Gda. Jeremiah O' Shaughnessy, from Ballybollock, Co. Meath''

:pac:

Thats not my real name and you know they (like many people) wanted me

Anyway, were way off topic now

deadwood

I'll get us back on topic.

If I have to do a bloody fatness test, after some chiefs son with a grudge due to the fact he was turned down for this job because of his tail suggests it to daddy after seeing on here, I'll be very upset.

My lycra days are over.