Carole wrote to Police News at the beginning of the year pointing out the disparity in uniform policies between constabulary and non-constabulary staff that had arisen since Police first offered Police employees the option of a corporate uniform in 2012.

Carole was one of the first to take up the $100 subsidy, which at that time helped to cover the cost of more than two shirts. Now, however, one shirt costs $80, “and you need more than one”, she says.

The subsidy has not increased in nine years, and, if you don’t use it, it doesn’t roll over into the next year.

Carole argues that many more Police employees “who want to look professional and feel valued” would like to wear the uniform but they now can’t afford them.

“Yes, we know it’s optional, which is why there’s only a subsidy and the rest of the cost is our responsibility, but we are Police staff regardless of what colour our uniform is,” Carole says. “We like to look professional when we are working too.”

Carole wears her shirt with the Police logo every day as do most of the other non-constabulary staff she works with, “even the IT staff”.

“It would be great to have the subsidy increased to a realistic amount in comparison to the cost of the shirts now. Also, to spend the subsidy in the first instance. If we go over, we top it up at our own expense and, lastly, not to lose the subsidy if we don’t use it every year.”

She suggests that if the subsidy is not used, it should be rolled over annually for a maximum of three years. That would enable staff to buy more items at once.

Inspector Braydon Lenihan, operations manager response capability, says changes to the subsidy are being considered as part of a wider review this year of all aspects of the corporate uniform.

“We’ll be looking at the whole system – is it still fit for purpose, how is it deployed, who needs to wear it, who wants to wear it? It’s about choice too.”

Police will be talking to uniform supplier Booker Spalding about costs and supply chains, some of which were disrupted by Covid-19 and, more recently, the container ship blockage in the Suez Canal.

Police Association president Chris Cahill has welcomed the review, saying he hopes it will be given priority this year. “We know from Police’s own people surveys that half of Police employees feel less valued than their constabulary colleagues. We wouldn’t want that perception reinforced by any unnecessary delays over something so specific to Police employees and relevant to Police’s image among the public.”

Drug-driver law changes endorsed

The Police Association is supporting a proposal before Parliament for a random roadside oral fluid testing regime to detect drug-drivers.

The association made select committee submissions last month in recognition of the considerable danger posed by drivers impaired by illicit, prescription and recreational drugs.

Its recommendations were formulated in consultation with senior road policing members who have working knowledge of the drink-driving laws and a heightened awareness of the hazards that such impaired drivers present.

Key points in the association’s submission included the need for consistency between penalties for drunk and drug-drivers, particularly with respect to the triggers for a 28-day impoundment of a vehicle or suspension of licence, and the liability thresholds for imprisonment and/or fines.

The association made clear its concerns at the ease with which drug drivers can avoid the “criminal” threshold of blood tests by electing oral fluid tests, for which a positive qualifies as the lower-level infringement.

If drug-driving is to be taken as seriously as drunk-driving, the association says, the bill needs to set a more realistic tipping point at which the accumulation of infringements crosses over into problematic serious criminal activity.

The full submission is available on our website policeassn.org.nz/newsroom/publications.