Deputy Chief Constable Crompton, April 2009 West Yorkshire Police HQ; Laburnum Road, Wakefield

Sir We are writing to inform you about serious concerns raised by large number of police officers and police staff of various ranks/grades from Black and Minority Ethnic backgrounds who serve in West Yorkshire Police. These concerns have been brought to the attention of both West Yorkshire Police Federation and the Black Police Association over the last six months. Primarily these concerns are centered on the Professional Standards Department and individual personnel who work within it and are fundamentally around disproportional of how cases are investigated, dealt with and finalised. The West Yorkshire Police Federation and the Black Police Association are working jointly to provide support to officers and provide legal advice as necessary. We understand a number of grievances have been lodged by Black and Minority Ethnic officers/staff around this issue whilst others have not lodged a grievance at this time but may do so in due course.

Many of our Black and Minority Officers and staff believe the Professional Standards Department has a real lack of community and cultural understanding and tend to stereotype officers and staff and their families from ethnic backgrounds. It is clear from speaking one to one with individuals that the message being delivered into their communities is one of distrust and the police being an institutionally racist organisation. These are genuine and grave concerns if they should reach the media thus bringing West Yorkshire Police into the limelight. In addition these officers are living in communities where there is a distrust of the police and this type of attention could possibly lead to civil unrest when you look at the bigger picture and the scale on which officers are complaining. On the Horizon published a report in February 2009 on Recruitment, Training and Promotion, Police and Racism: What has been achieved 10 years after the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry highlights that research should be undertaken to determine whether Ethnic Minority officers are disproportionately subjected to disciplinary procedures and why. Another report from the Runnymeade Trust, titled The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry 10 years on highlights the most recent information available from the Metropolitan Police Service indicates that Black and Minority Ethnic officers are over-represented in Fairness at Work procedures and among those lodging claims at Employment Tribunals in findings that echo those of the 2004 Morris enquiry. Statistics show that high proportion of Black and Minority Ethnic staff leave through resignation or dismissal as a result of Professional Standers Department investigation, we would say this would be the case in West Yorkshire Police. In the Police Review dated February 20th 2009 news articles highlight Black and Minority Ethnic officers and staffs are still being treated unfairly, and an inquiry has been set up by Boris Johnson, MPA Chairman, following a number of high profile employment tribunals against the Metropolitan Police. The definition for Institutional racism in the Stephen Lawrence enquiry; The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour, which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist. There doesnt seem to be any consideration on what adverse affects it will be having on those individuals who are suffering and the serious risk of health implications that is caused to them. The questions we need to ask ourselves are how we can serve the Communities that trust us when we dont have it within the organization.

Attached to this report are four examples of Professional Standards investigations and how the officers were dealt with and the second appendix draws on the very worrying trends.

These cases are not isolated and we are aware of other BME staff/officers within the organisation that are being investigated disproportionately. Concluding, there is no doubt that the issues raised could have a further impact on retention, promotion and selection to specialists posts by police officers and staff from Black and Minority Ethnic backgrounds, and there are further reports available that highlight these issues including; Race Equality Inspection Final Report 2007 NPIA 2008 Survey on Muslim Police Officers Commission report on Police and Racism 10 years on from the Macpherson Inquiry

Sir, we urge you to please consider the following recommendations; 1. As already identified by a public enquiry urgent research should be undertaken to determine whether Black and Minority Ethnic officers/Staff are being disproportionately subjected to disciplinary procedures and why.

2. To look into these allegations and report back to the Police Federation and Black Police Association within two weeks from the date of this report.

Yours sincerely

Peter Scott, JBB Secretary West Yorkshire Police Federation Black Police Association

Anita Patel

West Yorkshire

APPENDIX 1
CASE A During the course of an investigation involving 5 officers, 3 White, 2 BME, only the BME officers were banned from all stations with the exception of their home station. All the White officers were free to come and go as they please. This lasted for 1 1/2 years causing at times humiliation. There were allegations of bullying against the BME Supervisor, Statements were obtained from witnesses, two of whom stated they were in fact bullied by a White officer, evidence was given, and no investigation took place. The White officer was a witness against the BME officers The BME Officer was investigated for Computer Misuse, allegations of Misuse was made against a White officer that was never investigated. This officer was also a witness against the BME Officers. On Interviews PSD alleged they were not a possession of evidence to support the BME Officers version of events, they were and that was in breach of PACE. Officers were hounded to provide statements against the BME officers, one officer being asked 5 times, the other on 4 occasions even being visited at home and pressured into providing statements. On Interview PSD told the officer they were in possession of evidence they never had, again in breach of PACE. Contemporaneous notes made against the officer, were examined found to be unreliable by forensic examination, these were never investigated. During Interview, the interviewing officer asked the BME officer what would public perception be about his wife getting out of a Police Vehicle, stating a BME Officer with a BME women getting out of the vehicle, the officers wife is white. Investigating officers had made the assumption that BME only marry BME and by the very wording was racist.

On a number of occasions the BME officers made allegations of hate incidents by White officers involved in this investigation. To date no investigation has taken place or hate incident recorded. There was evidence of evidence being fabricated against the BME Officers, this was never investigated. Many of these incidents and the general unfair and bias investigation would have been raised at a hearing, however on the first day, PSD stated that pleading guilty would guarantee no resignation.

CASE B

PSD attended home address of officer and seized his mobile phone without any lawful power and did not serve a Regulation 9 Notice at the time either. Lack of Fairness and Impartiality - Investigated by officer despite an unresolved grievance against that officer by BME Officer from last year following the unlawful removal of his private vehicle from the police station car park. BME Officer not informed that he was under investigation. Was kept in the dark and not updated. Was also mis-informed that his file had been submitted and was encouraged to accept words of advice despite no wrongdoing. BME Officer was arrested by 7 officers from his mothers home address whilst certified on sick leave by his GP, and was detained for 12 hours and interviewed 4 times. Necessity criteria not satisfied as offence was 6 months old which is abuse of process and acting contrary to PACE & COP. Officer was not informed as to the grounds of arrest and the Custody Sergeant was taken into the back office. Warrant card was seized 3 days before suspension and no documentation was completed or left nor was the Officer informed. Investigating officer was reading text messages whilst driving. Investigating officer criticised and inappropriately discussed other officers who had been investigated and laughed at their expense by making inappropriate jokes.

Investigating officers criticised the Officer to his family members. One of the searching officer made unofficial notes and searched for items unconnected to the investigation and improperly questioned the officers sister. Interviewed about misconduct although arrested for criminal offence. Searched rental property and home address for unconnected items Investigating officer passed incorrect information to Officers insurance company resulting in the cancellation of his car insurance policy. Failure to deal with racist incidents, bullying and harassment.

BME officer was called a Terrorist for carrying a rucksack by a supervisor, and was asked to get a bacon butty for another supervisor whilst BME officer was fasting in Ramadan. BME officer was also sworn at by his tutor and bullied for months but no action was taken. Serving Regulation notices unnecessarily and for frivolous acts i.e. not filling in PNB, not informing supervisor of parking ticket, leaving work early all incorrect, baseless and childish.

Sch.1, para 9 of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2004, only requires the reporting of criminal proceedings, which means that an officer does not need to report being issued with a fixed penalty notice for a non-criminal offence, such as a parking ticket.

CASE C

Monthly suspension letters sent by PSD trying to bully Officer into leaving the Police. Sending letters to the Officer's home address with title as PC clearly displayed in the envelope window.

Discipline papers not attempted to be served by PSD until last three days and then deduct pay when not there. Have to provide confirmation to PSD where the Officer was living even though they knew, all correspondence had been sent to the address the Officer was living at. Visits to confirm where Officer was living even though they knew. Further letters asking me for Officers resignation. PSD lie about circumstances to discipline panel in an attempt to secure proven case against the Officer.

CASE D

False indications from the outset by the PSD Investigation Officers i.e. dont worry this will be sorted and you will get a warning. Inconsistencies between each PSD officer making it personal. They believe you are guilty from the outset. Investigations are not impartial. Over zealously in trying to ruin someone's life. Ignorance of facts that are produced to them. Evidence ignored. Whole investigation is one sided. Deliberately trying to cover any defenses. Underhanded tactics - i.e. Interview about matters for which no formal regulation notice has been served and then after interview serves it. Personal agenda's i.e. to get promotion, HPDS. Blinded and not interested in trying to establish the truth but find anything they can to persecute you. Fishing expedition. No link with original complaint.

Wishing you Happy Christmas after serving you with a regulation notice!! Professionalism?? PSD are investigating honesty and integrity of officers but PSD officers honesty and integrity is brought into question! Oppressive interviewing tactics i.e. silent treatment after asking questions, staring into the eyes and trying to intimidate you. If a member of the public was being investigated in a similar fashion there would definitely be scope for suing the force and charging them with the abuse of processes. Determined to meet their personal targets/performances and refusal to listen or reason. Trying to prove that Officer is bent/corrupt officer but on the same hand acknowledging (off tape) that Officer is a competent/hardworking and no person has a bad word to say about him. Playing mind games, using immoral tactics.

APPENDIX 2

The cases that have come to our attention over the last 6 months have highlighted some very worrying trends which clearly suggest:

1. Professional Standards Department are over zealous in their approach when investigation complaints against Black and Minority Ethnic officers/staff are acting over and above their investigative remit thereby infringing the human rights of black and minority officers.

2. Higher proportion of Black and Minority Ethnic officers/staff are on restricted duties or suspended than that of none Black and Minority Ethnic officers/staff.

3. Inconsistency and disproportionately in the way the investigations are conducted and sanctions on Black and Minority Ethnic officers/staff.

4. Concerns around integrity and serious professional conduct of Professional Standards Department officers.

5. Concerns around improperly obtaining evidence, harassment of Black and Minority Ethnic officers/staff, underhand and unethical behavior, lack of fairness and impartiality.

6. Timescale of investigation for Black and Minority Ethnic officer/staff are longer than that of non Black and Minority Ethnic officers/staff.