Climbing the walls

It's been a damn stressful few days - fairly inevitable, as we're on lates around payday - and I'm really feeling it.

I don't mind being busy. I'd rather be busy than bored. The problem with busy, though, is that if we're busy everyone's busy, and everyone's expectations of everyone else will rise, everyone's stressed.and tempers fray. Add in the fact that we're all human and several of my colleagues have got problems at home just now and you've got a recipe for some snappy words. Plus most of our supervisors are on leave so we're working for strangers who work a bit differently from what we're used to...

So, a precis of what's happened since my last post.

Lots of death earlier in the month - we got the impression that a lot of old folks and suicide risks held on for Christmas and then gave up the ghost late December and early January.

Lots of nutters. Police are superstitious about the full moon, and that enormous reddish globe hanging over us earlier in the month seemed to bring on all the full on, knife-wielding, Grade One loonies.

Lots of edge-of-seat stuff that turned out to be utter pony. In the last few weeks, I've seriously believed that we've had a helicopter crash, a major new terrorist threat, an incredibly well-organised car-crime ring capable of hitting three high-value targets at the same time and a domestic-related murder with the victim buried in concrete under a new housing development, all of which turned out to be complete and utter horseshit.

Plus all the usual rubbish from the public. Just as an illustration, I popped down to our call centre earlier to see a friend there and he was taking a 999 call about a car with the music playing too loud when I showed up. Unusually, though, our SMT seem to have started making sense about certain issues. Watch this space...

Caller in Distress

We've got this thing where we "upgrade" calls (that is, try to send help faster) dependent on the caller's level of distress. My fellow despatchers and I have discussed this policy at length and frankly, it's bollocks.

Thing is, everyone reacts to stress in different ways. For example, you might phone the police because your house was burgled while you were out at work. The offender clearly left hours ago so you're in no danger, but you're one of those people who reacts badly to someone being in your castle, so the calltaker raises the priority.

This will make absolutely no difference at all to the despatcher. If we've got an officer to send, we'll send him. However, if we've got another job arrive at the same moment from a caller who is completely calm but in actual physical danger, we're going to despatch an officer to that job first.

We risk assess every job and despatch to those with danger to life, danger to property, and then all the rest - in that order. Bollocks to how distressed the caller is.

Unusually, I'm going to share a piece of personal information with the readership here that - until now - only one other person knows about.

A while back, I had to call an ambulance for my then-partner, the person with whom I was at the time in love with and intended to spend my life with. I believe the ambulance call was necessary, but it wasn't life-threatening in any way - my partner needed medical help sometime within the next few hours, on a Saturday evening, through illness not alcohol, and 999 was the only way to get it.

I'd served my time in the call centre by then, and had been in Despatch for a while too, so I thought I knew the score. I'd been strong in front of my partner, and went upstairs to call the ambulance from the bedroom extension so as not to distress her any more.

And I cried like a little girl all the time I was talking to the ambulance call-taker.

She was completely professional and kept asking her scripted questions, clearly getting my answers through the blubs. I remember apologising for the state I was in, and being calmed by her calmness. By the time I went back downstairs the tears had gone and I was strong for my partner again. The ambulance arrived in due course and all ended well.

I'd like to thank the ambulance service for dealing with my call effectively, while weighing up its merits against other calls. Even when I was crying uncontrollably down the phone I knew that if the same situation had occurred during the week I'd have been on the phone to our GP - but I was distressed. If I believed my call was given higher priority because of that, I'd be deeply embarrassed.

My job is to look at all the incoming calls and treat them with the urgency I believe they deserve, based on the facts presented to me.

I wish my bosses would trust me to get on and do just that.

Gently does it

My last shift was an absolute arse, thanks to the weather which has been occurring over most of the country.

I came out proper cross (and made it home safely, thanks for asking) but not for the usual reasons. There was a lot of air traffic and my ankle actually still aches from pressing the transmit pedal, but it was unavoidable. I don't mind heavy air traffic when it's justified.

No, I was angry because this is the third year in a row that we've had enough snowfall to affect peoples' everyday lives and the county council and the force that I work for don't seem to have reacted in any way. The council are still on their policy of gritting A roads and nothing else. No pavements, no minor roads, no snowploughs - just grit lorries on the A roads.

On the area I worked, we managed to field one Land Rover, a dozen hours after it started snowing. All the other response officers were merrily getting stuck in the usual poxy Astras.

Unusually, a word of thanks goes out to the people of Bravo Sierra's force area. Yes, a lot of you called in because there were kids throwing snowballs and you deserve a special Chocolate Truncheon reward. But all the people out in their cars were generally sensible: we had hundreds of Section 170 calls, but no-one was daft enough to drive fast enough on snow and ice to injure themselves.

This will sound patronising, but it's not meant to: people of Bravoshire, congratulate yourselves on knowing your limits and driving slowly in dangerous conditions. Bumpers can be replaced: people can't.

A slightly more sarcastic "well-done" goes out to the usual characters: most of you managed not to have any domestics while we were busy getting stranded in the snow, so thanks for that.

Abuse of Power

Never, ever annoy your despatcher - even if she is a civilian and therefore a lower form of life - because she will find an excellent reason to send you to the job that involves urine, faeces or vomit. Oh yes.

More Airwave nonsense

I expect a load of old cobblers from the Daily Hate Mail, but unfortunately this story was also repeated elsewhere, including the BBC TV news. The article shows a quite embarrassing lack of understanding of what Airwave is and how it works.

Just for the record, I don't work for Airwave, I've got nothing to do with them apart from using their product every day and being reasonably well-trained on how it works.

To my mind, the biggest problem with Airwave is that police forces use it incredibly badly. The first thing to note is that it is not a radio system. It's a mobile phone network which can be forced to behave much like the old VHF/UHF radios, so – being people who generally don't like change – that's what police forces did when it came in.

The possibility of sending data through Airwave directly to the Control Room computer system was built into it from day one, but no-one ever used it until recently. We have an efficient and secure system for passing data, but because police forces don't like change, we still work on the 1960s system of saying everything over an open channel which every officer can hear. Like I said, Airwave wasn't designed to be used like this so forcing it to behave in a way that it doesn't really like means big bills.

I don't see why this is such a difficult concept for the Mail to grasp – after all, I have free data on my mobile phone contract, but I have to pay to make calls after I've used a certain number of minutes.

I also genuinely don't understand why the Dorset Police Federation is so resistant to using the data features. Common functions can be accessed with a couple of button presses, and updating incident logs can be done as easily as sending a text message. Many response officers are in their 20s and grew up texting so it really shouldn't be a foreign concept to them.

According to the Mail article, Former Scotland Yard Flying Squad commander John O’Connor said: ‘It is going to impact on their safety and operational efficiency. How can they be sure their text is going to be picked up so colleagues know their location? If you are talking to a colleague, they know exactly where you are and what you’re doing. This is another layer of red tape which is being imposed in order to save an unquantifiable amount of money. Chief constables should stand up and say they are not going to accept it.’

What a load of absolute balls. Mr O'Connor clearly hasn't been in a Control Room for some years. My force is advising a common-sense approach to using data messaging: the text system should be for non-urgent updates and clearances, but if you're heading into danger or running a major incident you should still use the air. There are situations where everyone needs to know what's going on, and we should keep the open channel for that – but it should not be full of chatter all the time.

As well as the text messaging system, officers can update their status at the press of a button. For example, they need to tell us if they're going non-deployable for whatever reason (meal break, vehicle maintenance, taking a statement, prisoner transport or what-have-you). This can be done by pressing one button on their Airwave set, which costs the force nothing. Or, they can call up on the air, make everyone's radios beep and chatter, an operator updates their status on the Control Room computer, and Airwave's chief accountant rubs his little hands in glee.  Which do you think is more efficient?

Again, we've got a common-sense approach to this. If you're the first unit to arrive at a big pub fight, you call up on the air and let everyone know you're there and potentially in danger. If you're going to the scene of a burglary, where the offenders have left and there's no risk, just press your “arrived” button.

There's not just the cost to consider, there's also the limited capacity of the human being back in the Control Room. It's hard enough to keep up with a busy Friday night as it is, without the air being full of non urgent updates. If you call up on the air with a minor update at 2am on a Saturday morning the operator might well ignore it in favour of the hundred other things he's trying to do. These days, I have the option of telling that officer to use data messaging instead.

Updating incident logs is not “another layer of red tape” - it is absolutely necessary. Dorset Police (and my force) are simply trying to find the cheapest and most efficient way of doing it.

As far as I'm aware, Mr O'Connor is right in saying that it would save an “unquantifiable” amount of money as Airwave billing is extremely complex. Unquantifiable exactly, but we can make an educated guess. For my force, we'd be talking tens of thousands – maybe £100,000 – per year. That is not to be sniffed at. If we can achieve that sort of saving just by using our existing equipment more effectively, then we absolutely should. We are spending your tax money and we have a duty not to waste it just because we don't want to learn a new way of doing things.

If Airwave are making massive profits, well, I'm glad someone is. Although I'm rather embarrassed that it's happening because we're incapable of training our officers to use a product that we've had for 10 years.

Knowing one's location

I'm working Quietsville when a beat bobby calls up, lots of noise going on in the background.

"Bravo Sierra Control, I've got two in custody for shoplifting, Sainsburys, Quietsville town centre - can I have a van on the hurry-up please?"

The van unit is free and immediately heads towards.  When he gets there, he calls up again.

"Control, can you confirm that officer's location?  We're at Quietsville Sainsburys and there's nothing going on."

The beat officer replies, slightly embarrassed, still with offenders swearing in the background.

"I'm actually in Othertown...  I normally work Quietsville but I'm here on attachment.  I'll switch to their channel."

Whoops.

Facebook Suicides

I've had more than one of these, now, almost identical in circumstances, so I reckon I can safely say there's a lot of it about.  If it's happened on my watch more than once I bet it's happened in other Forces too.

It goes like this:  someone in a foreign country (OK, honestly, an American male) has befriended someone from this country (OK, honestly, a female) over the internet.  They might have been talking for months, shared their life history and all their problems, and consider themselves friends, but never met.


The English, female party then intimates or threatens suicide.  The American 'net friend acts like a concerned and responsible friend, exercises his internet detective skills and does his best to alert the local police force.

Mostly, we can't find any evidence to suggest that the women even exist.  That is, it's a false name and address, there's no record of them anywhere, and if the address even exists the people who live there are completely baffled by our turning up on their doorstep with blue lights on.

There was one very satisfying occasion where we found the person responsible and although I won't go into detail here I think that person ended the day very, very embarrassed.

I've mentioned before that I don't find suicide funny.  My blood goes cold when these jobs come in, I do my level best to double-check the informant's internet detective work, and then dive into police systems to see what I can find.  No-one is going to die of laziness on my watch.

But when we do, inevitably, find out that it was some sick fuck's idea of a joke, I shudder.  Pretending to someone who cares for you that you've killed yourself, even if he's never met you?  That's inhuman.