The case of PC Grewal

Please read this post with the good intent in which it is written. 200 weeks, who I quite like, has written about the case of PC Grewal in the Met where she suffered alleged racial and religious discrimination and where she has been awarded a five figure sum for hurt to feelings. This is not a dig at 200.  One, the assault on armed service staff, is physical, and nasty; the other is emotional, you can’t see, but you may feel it. We can talk about PC Grewal’s case in particular. Basically as we understand, one of the trainers was not objective, therefore the argument is, were they taking the pee? For how long? And why? Were other class mates  encouraged to take part in taking the pee further? F hell, this is a group we are supposed to be training. It is the continued course that could have affected PC Grewal’s career that is an issue. She could have lost her job. If she is able to do her job why continue to take the pee, as a big group, outnumbering her?

Let’s just take an example of how taking the pee out of the colour Black can continue for some time. What happens when you say to a Senior boss, I’m not happy with this, you might actually be putting the community and our colleagues at risk because of your misinterpretation of the manner in which you want to implement race relations legislation. Firstly, these are the sort of actions some managers take:

(1) They speak to one another about you, undermining you. They certainly are not honest with you as to what they discuss when they speak about you to others.

(2) They may even speak to your bosses; this might undermine you further.

(3) All of this may take place outside of your hearing and attention. And you know something isn’t quite right.

(4) Then you say something else to help them. But they don’t like you. They repeat actions (1) to (3) continuously.

(5) At a meeting of the Police Authority you advise the Police Authority that actually they should be monitoring the manner in which the Force have implemented legislation and the senior HR person then undermines you at the time to the Federation by dissing you. The Diversity flagship are allegedly present. Not that you feel alone or anything; but it’s like a big party and your not welcome.

(6) The HR person then writes to you in an aggressive and what some may conclude is a threatening manner.

(7)  And all the time they are repeating actions (1) to (3).

(8) They even then say to you that actually your views are not representative of the BPA. That’s cool really because there are some BPA members that only come to the BPA when they need support. Other than that they remain hidden. Who would want to represent those with no views? Of course you can’t represent everyone, but you do represent the difference between right and wrong. Come on, does the Federation represent the views of all it’s members, or does it represent the views of the JBB, which actually might be to different to the voice of some members. And Chiefsy, when he or she is leading, does he/she do what his /her officers want? Or does he/she do what he/she believes to be right?

(9) And then finally in the past they used other incompetent Black people to oust you from any position of influence; this time they oust you by other means. Remember all the time, they repeat steps (1) to (3). Now based on this, would you actually have trust and confidence in any of these senior people? We wouldn’t. Assuming the fact that you are correct, what given them the right to treat you badly simply because their understanding is poor and based on their experiences; and in their experiences there is no radar for racism.

(10) If then, you have consistently, on at least 2 occasions, not been handed figures form the Diversity flagship, what then? Clearly that is not about ignoring you is it?

Now, our point is this; blowing off someone arms and legs in a war zone is bad news. Stressedoutcop will hopefully tell you that causing mental hurt and distress is different. You just don’t expect your lot to blow you up when you are being honest with them so that actually we can do better. The issue of awards to armed services personnel that are injured is different. We cannot and should not compare mental anguish and physical loss unless we are prepared to say both are wrong. In the case of PC Grewal, if the trainer was our of order, and had over stepped the mark, then deal with him/her, move on, and try and ensure this doesn’t happen again. Building camaraderie and bullying; there’s a fine line isn’t there?