Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Police Inspector sues Greater Manchester Police after failing 'Riot Test'

  • 12-06-2011 12:15PM
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭


    .. and wins!

    The 'riot test' in question is designed to show if an officer is fit enough to meet a standard that has been set for decades (with regards to policing riots) and obviously is in place with members of the public's safety in mind, not to mention that of fellow officers. The Inspector sued Greater Manchester Police on grounds of sex & age discrimination, won .. and will be awarded around £30,000!
    Woman inspector 'humiliated' by failing riot test wins up to £30k!

    For 30 years it has been used to test the fitness of officers who police riots and other outbreaks of serious public disorder.
    The so-called 'shield run' involves officers covering a distance of 500 metres in less than two minutes, 45 seconds while wearing full riot gear and carrying a shield.
    But when Inspector Diane Bamber, 51, failed to meet the time limit, she claimed she had been left humiliated.

    She brought a sex and age discrimination case against her force, Greater Manchester Police, and now stands to win up to £30,000 after an employment tribunal ruled in her favour.

    Officers have to be able to run a distance of 500 metres in two minutes, 45 seconds in full riot gear

    The landmark case has opened the door for thousands of other women officers to claim payouts and has triggered a review of specialist police training across the country.
    Insp Bamber, a serving officer for more than 30 years who still works for Greater Manchester Police, attended an Initial Public Order Commanders' Course in Lancashire in November 2008.

    She complained to the tribunal that prior to the course starting she had been led to believe that she would not have to take part in the shield run. But on the day of the test, Insp Bamber was informed that all officers who wanted to be considered for events where trouble was a possibility would have to pass it.
    She agreed to run but she did not finish in the allotted time. Her failure meant she could not complete the rest of the training course.
    When Insp Bamber applied to retake the shield run, it is alleged that one of her colleagues remarked: 'She's got no f****** chance.'
    In fact she did pass at the second attempt several months later – after Greater Manchester Police made it easier by raising the time limit to three minutes.

    The tribunal heard that on the second occasion, Insp Bamber gave herself the equivalent of an extra 20 seconds by starting at the front of the group. Previously, she had started at the back but the clock starts when the first person sets off.

    In her ruling, Judge Hilary Slater said Insp Bamber's claims of indirect sex and age discrimination were 'well-founded'.
    Noting that the officer had 'suffered humiliation at being sent away from the course', Judge Slater added: 'The tribunal concludes that the claimant was put at the disadvantage suffered by women and persons of her age group in that she failed the test and was not able to complete the training.'
    The shield run was first introduced in the Eighties when Scotland Yard used it to test the fitness of officers policing the Notting Hill Carnival. Greater Manchester Police also conducted the runs for 30 years but has now dropped them.

    The Mail on Sunday understands that the Association of Chief Police Officers is now reviewing the lawfulness of the physical training formats for 13 specialist operational roles, including those for firearms officers, which could discriminate against women and older officers.
    Last night Tory MP Robert Halfon said: 'At a time when forces face enormous challenges and need to do all they can to protect frontline service, it is bizarre they are being forced to use taxpayers' money to pay compensation in cases such as these.'
    The level of compensation will be set later this month.
    Source

    So with that in mind, I am suing Wimbledon Lawn Tennis Club as they have refused me entry this year based on the discriminatory grounds that I don't meet a certain "standard of play" :mad:


«134

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 58 ✭✭ciff


    Well this has opened a can of worms in which I can see many women taking advantage of. At the risk of turning into a sexism issue but if that had been a man complaining he'd have been told to bugger off.

    The poor sensitive lady gets 30,000 grand because she wasn't fit, quick enough to finish the original course on time and was left humiliated. Yeah right.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,968 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    And she in an Inspector, how is she going to lead tough sergeants who won't respect her or young recruits who look to her for leadership.

    She can keep her 30k but she'll be stuck into some back office doing paperwork for the rest of her career

    A sergeant would laugh in her face if she gave orders at a riot


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    The thing is, even if this was a guy, who was just suing on the 'age discrimination' part of this, it would be a nonsense. Changing standards that have bet set for public safety reasons is scandalous. It's not just political correctness gone mad, it's political correctness gone stark raving bonkers.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    Quite the blow for equality and an emarassment for womens rights movement.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Woman judge, nuff said.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,060 ✭✭✭✭biko


    amacachi wrote: »
    Woman judge, nuff said.
    Take it to conspiracy forum ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,018 ✭✭✭Mike 1972


    The Mail on Sunday understands

    Does not compute :confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭mgmt


    Political Correctness gone too far. If you can't pass the test, then you are unfit for the job and a danger to others. Simple.

    It reminds me of another case involving the FDNY. Too few blacks were passing the entrance exams so a US federal judged deemed the exams to be discriminatory. :confused: Claiming different education standards.
    http://articles.cnn.com/2009-07-22/justice/firefighter.discrimination_1_white-firefighters-hispanic-firefighters-exams?_s=PM:CRIME


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭Gunsfortoys


    I wonder how much she would have gotten for getting her nose broke at a riot?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭PK2008


    Send her to Belfast for the Marching season......


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 794 ✭✭✭Redlion


    It's unbelievable that they gave her 30 grand, especially considering British police forces are taking a financial battering at the moment.

    By the way, I never understood how humiliation be measured in monetary terms. Do they have a chart ranging from defamation of character to shatting yourself at your own wedding?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,815 ✭✭✭✭galwayrush


    A friend of mine works in a recruitement agency, they needed to recruit a person for a council in Manchester to inspect roofs in council houses, a guy in a wheelchair got the job because he threatened to sue if he didn't because he claimed he had all necessary qualifications bar working legs..:pac:
    Cost the council a fortune in hiring a special mobile crane to enable him to inspect the roofs.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,719 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    to shitting yourself at your own wedding?

    Grammar corrected ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,387 ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    Equality at some times, preferential treatment at others.


    DeV.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,235 ✭✭✭Bosco boy


    Next riot put her on the front line and she may realise the reason there are fitness levels and standards, she'll probally get more money afterwards for post tramautic stress, some women in police forces are excellent but in my opinion most are looking for and angle or a cop out from the day they join. But the political correct world we live in serves us well alright!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,361 ✭✭✭mgmt


    I wonder what the gender breakdown of gardai behind desks in the Garda Depot.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,662 ✭✭✭RMD


    One thing that really wrecks my head is easier targets for women in security services such as police and armed forces.

    You're either good enough to meet the time or not regardless of sex. If you can't meet a realistic time (500m in 165 seconds) it's not because you're a women or 51 years old, it's because you're an incapable lazy shít. It's not hard to run that distance even with a lot of weight on (20-30kg), put in the work and you'll breeze it. PC crap gone mad. Are they supposed to make allowances for her when they have to rush a group of rioters? "Hold on folks, we have to wait for the inspector!!!".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭Son Of A Vidic


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    The thing is, even if this was a guy, who was just suing on the 'age discrimination' part of this, it would be a nonsense. Changing standards that have bet set for public safety reasons is scandalous. It's not just political correctness gone mad, it's political correctness gone stark raving bonkers.


    Absolutely, gender is irrelevant here. An established test parameter has been set. So if you fail to meet the requirements, then that is the fault of the individual concerned not the test itself. Too right she should feel humiliated, she fail the bloody test ffs! So now the test has been redesigned to prevent an individual becoming ashamed or humiliated through failure. But shouldn't that have been her motivation to pass in the first place?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,650 ✭✭✭✭minidazzler


    Rioters don't discriminate at who they are throwing rocks at so the tests shouldn't either. And they didn't. If there is a fitness standard it should be kept, given that being old or female is not gonna stop you getting the **** kicked out of you. She's a plonker TBH.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    RMD wrote: »
    One thing that really wrecks my head is easier targets for women in security services such as police and armed forces.
    What really confuses me about that is some purse-snatchers that will run a little bit slower if they are being chased by a woman cop.


    Oh wait, that doesn't happen.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,801 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    If I was her, I'd predict I diet.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Bosco boy wrote: »
    some women in police forces are excellent but in my opinion most are looking for and angle or a cop out from the day they join.
    What's opinion got to do with it? It's either a fact or it isn't - and unless you're a mind-reader you eh... don't know.

    OT: Yes, excessive political correctness is a huge problem in parts of the UK public sector.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    DeVore wrote: »
    Equality at some times, preferential treatment at others.


    DeV.
    Indeed. I wonder how bad things have to get before we see a serious men's movement starting off? I'm all for equality, but that's not what we are getting.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    As long as men say stuff like "I wonder how bad things have to get before we see a serious men's movement starting off?" rather than actually doing anything, a long time I'd imagine...

    Incidentally, there's a domestic abuse centre for men in Navan (an excellent service) started by... a woman.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,801 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Dudess wrote: »
    Incidentally, there's a domestic abuse centre for men in Navan (an excellent service) started by... a woman.
    Why is it relevant that a woman started of??? Thats a pretty sexist thing to point out.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Fukuyama


    Have I got this straight?

    She spent too many hours sitting around eating pies. When the time came to pass the test, the officer failed due to lack of fitness.

    This is not down to gender or age. I'm sure there are 50+ female officers who are more than capable of passing.

    Yet she is suing because she feels humiliated that she failed? :confused:

    Also, she'd be giving orders in a riot. So when there's bricks, stones, bottles and petrol bombs incoming and the cops are taking a hammering; they'd have nobody to lead them because tubs is still catching up!! :eek:

    Last time I checked angry mobs don't tend to hold back and wait for aul lady cops to catch their breath. It's go go go and she's not able for it. Case closed.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Fukuyama


    Why is it relevant that a woman started of??? Thats a pretty sexist thing to point out.

    No it's not. It's stating a fact. Don't sue the poster whatever you do... :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭Gunsfortoys


    Dudess wrote: »

    Incidentally, there's a domestic abuse centre for men in Navan (an excellent service) started by... a woman.

    What difference does it make that it was a woman that set it up?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Why wasn't it started by a man though? On these threads there are always the same old "Equality - it's an illusion", "If it was a man, there would be x reaction" whingey comments. Why not be pro-active so, instead of moaning on the internet?

    I don't believe in equality (in its crudest sense) across the board anyway as men and women are different - biology in the first place is "sexist": men can't have babies, men can't feed babies with their bodies, women don't have the same physical strength as men etc - so these looney cases that appear to be for the sake of equality aren't representative of all women and what all women want.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭Gunsfortoys


    Dudess wrote: »
    Why wasn't it started by a man though? On these threads there are always the same old "Equality - it's an illusion", "If it was a man, there would be x reaction" whingey comments. Why not be pro-active so, instead of moaning on the internet?

    I don't believe in equality (in its crudest sense) across the board anyway as men and women are different - biology in the first place is "sexist": men can't have babies, men can't feed babies with their bodies, women don't have the same physical strength as men etc - so these looney cases that appear to be for the sake of equality aren't representative of all women and what all women want.

    What the hell hs this got to do with the OP?!?!


Advertisement