Special Sergeant

[Storm]

While I'm not 'dissing' the specials, having not long left them myself, I have to say I think it's a daft idea.

Some of the SO's I worked with were spot on, and deserve some recognition for the time and effort they put in. Some I have barely met despite doing over 400 hours service. To give these people the 'kudos' of the rank of Sgt would be a mistake and is likely to create a greater divide between the regulars and the specials.

[danny5219]

I am a special in the Notts force and can confirm there is a rank structure here ... although I personally do not see the point of progressing too far up this ranking structure not because it will create a divide between regulars and specials just for the simple fact that you are taken off operational duty when you reach a certain rank and are managing the ranks below ... surely this is not what you join for when you become a special

[watts5852]

Ive read the above posts and where i appreciate the majority of comments some are fairly silly to be honest.

I, as a special 'sergeant' ,section officer, volunteer with a stripe on his shoulder or whatever regulars, special colleagues or members of the public want to call me or tell me I am,  fully understand that the rank structure is fundamentally alittle pointless for specials. For me it means i have pulled alittle more weight than others and have earned an achievement for recognition and for the past 6 months have been trying my best for the reputation of the special constabulary.

The first thing my skipper said to me when he saw my stripe was 'well done, congratulations, you deserve it' and that gave me more of a reason to keep coming back to do this for nothing and help YOU guys and girls out on a weekend and serve the people with whom i live on a Saturday night rather than sitting in a pub or going out with the misses than any incentive or advertising campaign could ever muster.

We or at least i, do not go around thinking 'I'm gonna tell that regular what to do' it simply wont happen will it, lets be honest, unless i had balls the size of water melons I'm not gonna tell someone who is so much more knowledgeable on all areas than i the odds in a situation and would only advise only if i have a good understanding of what to do.

I will be the first to hold my hand up and say 'i am in no way qualified to the same level at present or will ever be as a regular police sergeant simply down to the fact of I'm not learning at the same level as they may be on a regular basis or at all and i know it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not offended,i haven't taken a bad view on all of your opinions and i know where your coming from, I'm just alittle stunned that some of you are being so narrow minded.
In a perspective view, if it were me i wouldn't like having lots of SP S's thinking they were more than they were but,  i know we don't and those who do would be 'knocked' down a peg or two as you would expect.

If only in my nick we don't think more of ourselves and i would suggest that the story is the same throughout the land.
I would imagine that its not all going to be a Rosy in a small minority type scenario thing but even when it does change back to the ranking system for all forces i don't think it will change much.

OK Ive said my piece, and apologise for being alittle abrasive, but ive been monitoring this thread for a while and thouoght i would say something. So, please feel free to dissect my post and continue going round and round in circles.

Regards
Kieran

[Adam]

I think you're missing the point.  The issue isn't one of specials having supervising ranks; it's of putting an comparatively untrained officer on a par with a highly trained officer and calling them the same thing.  
I had no objection whatsoever to the rank of section officer, i do object to special sergeants, the only thing to have changed is the name and that's what i have a problem with.

As an anecdotal bit of evidence, there was a DO here a few years back who wanted regulars to call her ma'am.  She was called something with 4 letters, but it wasn't ma'am!

[Only1]

I think you're missing the point.  The issue isn't one of specials having supervising ranks; it's of putting an comparatively untrained officer on a par with a highly trained officer and calling them the same thing.  
I had no objection whatsoever to the rank of section officer, i do object to special sergeants, the only thing to have changed is the name and that's what i have a problem with.

As an anecdotal bit of evidence, there was a DO here a few years back who wanted regulars to call her ma'am.  She was called something with 4 letters, but it wasn't ma'am!

Precisely - many of the comments made by the above posters have been made with the benefit of experience - many are former specials, including myself.

Whilst most specials have no illusions of grandeur - I know of plenty who do.....to have the idea of calling some of these officers, Sgt, Insp, Ch Insp etc is a bad one and will confuse the public, courts, CPS etc....

There is nothing wrong with being called Sub Divisional Officer, Divisional Officer etc, so why change it needlessly?

[Only1]

I think you're missing the point.  The issue isn't one of specials having supervising ranks; it's of putting an comparatively untrained officer on a par with a highly trained officer and calling them the same thing.  
I had no objection whatsoever to the rank of section officer, i do object to special sergeants, the only thing to have changed is the name and that's what i have a problem with.

As an anecdotal bit of evidence, there was a DO here a few years back who wanted regulars to call her ma'am.  She was called something with 4 letters, but it wasn't ma'am!

Precisely - many of the comments made by the above posters have been made with the benefit of experience - many are former specials, including myself.

Whilst most specials have no delusion's of grandeur - I know of plenty who do.....to have the idea of calling some of these officers, Sgt, Insp, Ch Insp etc is a bad one and will confuse the public, courts, CPS etc....

There is nothing wrong with being called Sub Divisional Officer, Divisional Officer etc, so why change it needlessly?

[watts5852]

 The issue isn't one of specials having supervising ranks; it's of putting an comparatively untrained officer on a par with a highly trained officer and calling them the same thing.

Ok so the part where i mentioned about not being as qualified as a regular sergeant and knowing it suggests im missing the point?

AT end of the day i couldnt give a monkey's what i was called albeit sergeant. section officer or whatever. My point is that in my opinion we dont have this problem where iam stationed and i imagine never will.
As i said in my post if i were in the postion of a regular i wouldnt stand a special talking down to me, and if one did then appropriate action would be taken as you would expect.

[Only1]

 The issue isn't one of specials having supervising ranks; it's of putting an comparatively untrained officer on a par with a highly trained officer and calling them the same thing.

Ok so the part where i mentioned about not being as qualified as a regular sergeant and knowing it suggests im missing the point?

Watts, while YOU may not consider yourself on par, there are specials who actually think they are equally as qualified as regular officers- they were there when I was a special and they are there when I was a Sgt in the Met.

Having said that, common sense isn't something you can teach, as such there are many specials who i'd rather trust to complete a task properly than certain regular officers.

[watts5852]

Only1, i apologise. i appreciate i may have seen this as a dig, but have realised and seen the bigger picture.

I can only imagine that there are those that see themselves as bigger fish than they are and deem it ok to spoil it for the rest but for the vast majority of us this is not the case.

Kieran

[Adam]

You were missing the point when you we writing about being given recognition for good work by being promoted.  The point i was making was not that you don't deserve recognition and promotion, i'm sure you do, but that the argument is about the name and hte name alone.

[SgtAngel]

watts5852

At least with the MPS the rank insignia has not changed. Is there anything on your uniform which would allow me instantly spot that you are a special?

[watts5852]

Metplod,

The only difference to my uniform is i have a silver bar under my warrant number, to the regulars in my force they instantly know im a special with the 5 thousand warrant number. But to joe public this offers no visual difference in status or competence.
Ive had this conversation with a few regular colleagues and with all i have pointed out that most members of the public dont look at any ranking insignia and merely recognise the uniform,
so expect exactly the same level of knowledge, competence and professionalism that they pay for, even if some dont deserve it.

[Only1]

Metplod,

The only difference to my uniform is i have a silver bar under my warrant number, to the regulars in my force they instantly know im a special with the 5 thousand warrant number. But to joe public this offers no visual difference in status or competence.
Ive had this conversation with a few regular colleagues and with all i have pointed out that most members of the public dont look at any ranking insignia and merely recognise the uniform,
so expect exactly the same level of knowledge, competence and professionalism that they pay for, even if some dont deserve it.

I was all for the removal of huge badges that said 'special constabulary' on Special's uniform, along with the same equipment being issued - all it did was make Specials a target - and thus make their job harder than it needed to be.

The visible rank insignia remaining the same is one thing - however duplicating the regular rank structure will still create confusion at court etc - it may also prove confusing with corries and computer records.....

I still cant see what is wrong with the separate rank structure, such as SDO's and DO's???