Port of Tilbury-Police Constable

[Fedster + 1,307]

New dress code bans tattoos and introduces facial hair rules.

 

Date - 3rd September 2018
By - JJ Hutber- Police Oracle

2 Comments

 

A chief constable insisted new force policy vetoing stubble has been “well received” by his staff.

Unite union described the South Yorkshire Police dress and appearance code as “entirely unnecessary”.

Staff and officers are banned from dying their hair extreme or vivid colours (or using hair accessories which are not black or navy), growing long beards or stubble or having getting tattoos visible in normal duty uniform.

Existing staff are ordered to cover up tattoos, wearing long sleeves where necessary, and new tattoos on the head, face, neck, hands or arms will be considered gross misconduct.

Jewellery is restricted to small stud earrings, a watch, wedding or signet ring and a necklace worn under clothing.

The guidance, which was rolled out this summer, applies to all public-facing staff and officers.

“South Yorkshire Police recognises the prevalence of body art in modern society and the right of each individual to make their own choices about their appearance.

“We are cognisant however, that for a cross section of the public we serve, visible tattoos can serve to diminish the confidence they have in us as public servants,” the dress code states.

“Tattoos that are visible in normal duty uniform i.e. face, scalp, ears, neck, hands, and forearms or visible in an open collared/short sleeved shirt are not considered appropriate for those in public facing roles.

“Existing staff with such visible tattoos must ensure they are covered at all times.

“Facial hair should be neat and tidy. Do not dye it in conspicuously unnatural colours. An unshaven/stubbly appearance is unacceptable unless you are growing a beard or moustache. This does not apply where there is a genuine medical reason not to shave.

“Lengthy beards are not acceptable for health and safety reasons.”  

Officers are also not allowed to wear uniform for off-duty social media appearances and must write to their district command team if they want to wear uniform to an event.

Staff union Unite said South Yorkshire Police did not consult with them before introducing the policy.  

Regional officer Shane Sweeting said: “The rules on matters such as tattoos and hair colouring mean that South Yorkshire police and police staff will not reflect the community they serve, which is essential to gain the support of the general public”.

“Unite fully appreciates that police officers and public facing staff need to have some guidance but to issue this huge procedures document is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

“Unite will fully support any member who falls foul of the policy or who believes that the policy is unfair or discriminatory and we will be lobbying South Yorkshire police to enter into meaningful negotiations to produce a workable policy that reflects the society which we live.”

South Yorkshire Police admitted the consultation process “could have been concluded more succinctly” but said it is “disingenuous to say the Unite trade union was not consulted”.

A spokesman for the force said the new regulations are “part of a wider drive to achieve excellence”.

Chief Constable Stephen Watson who sanctioned the change in policy said: “What is described as ‘draconian’ in some quarters represents no more than a clear and reasonable set of expectations as to the professional appearance of our staff.

“The idea that our taking a clear stance on these issues will come at the expense of public confidence is simply wrong.

“Our staff are proud to represent South Yorkshire Police and the Crown and this policy sets out what the public have a right to expect of their police force.

“It is for this reason that the policy, whilst perhaps not universally popular, has been well received by many of our staff who are as anxious as I am to uphold standards.”

In neighbouring West Yorkshire Police officers are permitted small and inoffensive tattoos on their necks and hands but not arms while North Yorkshire Police officers do not have to cover up with long sleeves.

Earlier this summer West Yorkshire Police federation equalities lead Guy King told Police Oracle the federation has been pushing to change the force tattoo policy for some time as members consider it outdated and unfair.

View On Police Oracle

[Hyphen + 693]

I don’t think there is anything overly ‘draconian’ with what has been mentioned. It doesn’t really sound like much new, just reinforcing pretty standard uniform policies.

The only thing I don’t agree with is the nonsense around tattoos. I agree about the neck and face, however, non offensive tattoos on the arms would not undermine confidence at all. They are very common now and in many sections of society are not unusual. I do not have any tattoos personally but I just don’t see the issue.

I am a supporter of uniform standards, it does wind me up when I see officers of all ranks looking like a mess. Usually ill fitting uniform, no polish on boots, wrinkly trousers and the like. A lot of forces don’t help their officers though, for example issuing high vis stab vests. They always look scruffy.

On the other hand though, do senior officers really think through things like this, particularly the tattoo thing. Morale is rock bottom, people are drowning, there is no money or resources to deal with anything, people are going off left right and centre with stress and this is one of the top priorities? 

I wonder though, will the force ban all the rainbow items/epaulettes etc? face paint in uniform and all of the associated ‘dress up’ that cops do for pride events. That is FAR more likely to undermine confidence in the Police than a tattoo sleeve.

 

Edited September 3, 2018 by Hyphen

[Ether + 1,401]

About time, the state of some officers hardly projects professionalism. But this should include PCSO’s and police staff. 

Like it or not, appearance matters. 

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

Unite are complaining, as usual. It is about time that the tail stopped wagging the dog. A long overdue policy. The problem only arises because some lackadaisical forces have allowed it in the past.

[Jeebs + 1,190]

I take issue with the term public servant, we are not public servants. If the bosses can’t even get that right, what hope do we have!

[Hyphen + 693]

14 minutes ago, Jeebs said:

I take issue with the term public servant, we are not public servants. If the bosses can’t even get that right, what hope do we have!

Good point, it irritates me when YouTube law students like to spout that one! 

[JulietAlpha1 + 515]

It makes me laugh when bosses go on about about these comparatively minor issues and how they negatively affect public confidence. Nothing is going to affect public confidence as much as us not being able to provide the service we’re expected to provide which is exactly what is going on at the moment. I agree with uniform standards, except for the tattoo policy, I think tattoos are far more widely accepted than chiefs think. Realistically, however, do we think people who have been waiting for days for officers to see them, or when who have been told that we are unable to investigate their report because of overwhelming demand, are really going to be that bothered about the standard of the uniform in front of them.

Initiatives like these really push my buttons and highlight how out of touch senior officers are with what is going on at the front line. I really do despair.

[a-bothan-spy 81]

What a farce. The CoP and Fed are pushing for a more relaxed tattoo policy and this force goes in the opposite direction.

[Growley + 2,436]

That's pretty much the standard in the Met already, and just like in the Met, I imagine it'll be ignored most of the time.

 

Personally, I support more action around uniform standards. It is frankly embarrassing seeing some of the scruffy cops we have. I'd also like to see the rules around beards kept more in check; if you can't grow a proper one, suck it up and get the razor out.

 

 

 

 

[Zulu 22 + 4,575]

2 hours ago, JulietAlpha1 said:

It makes me laugh when bosses go on about about these comparatively minor issues and how they negatively affect public confidence. Nothing is going to affect public confidence as much as us not being able to provide the service we’re expected to provide which is exactly what is going on at the moment. I agree with uniform standards, except for the tattoo policy, I think tattoos are far more widely accepted than chiefs think. Realistically, however, do we think people who have been waiting for days for officers to see them, or when who have been told that we are unable to investigate their report because of overwhelming demand, are really going to be that bothered about the standard of the uniform in front of them.

Initiatives like these really push my buttons and highlight how out of touch senior officers are with what is going on at the front line. I really do despair.

How low do you expect standards to fall?  Have they not fallen low enough already. 

[Hyphen + 693]

I like to think we can all agree that uniform standards are important but the reply above is very similar to my views. We can’t even do the day to day of policing anymore. Does someone having a tattoo on their arm really impact on public confidence? Or is it the poor levels of service being offered? 

Are forces going to take some responsibility around issuing uniform that is smart? T shirts and cheap faded cargo trousers and a high vis ill fitting vest (many forces) isn’t the most smart outfit. 

Many senior officers celebrate cops defacing their uniform and dancing around  yet want to have a go at the hard working officer who wants to wear short sleeves with some tattoos. 

[JulietAlpha1 + 515]

1 hour ago, Zulu 22 said:

How low do you expect standards to fall?  Have they not fallen low enough already. 

Standards are low, but as has been said, basic uniform standards are not enforced as they should be and things slip. At the moment tattoos should not be on display and I would not disagree with any supervisor that enforced the policy. The issue is lack of consistency amongst teams, areas, districts, departments and forces.

On the other hand, I don’t think inoffensive tattoos on the upper or lower arms should have to be covered and I think the policy should be changed. I still don’t think hand, neck and face tattoos are acceptable as they do have a ‘thuggish’ appearance to them.

[Indiana Jones + 1,082]

Is the policy evidence based or just anecdotal and based on the opinion of a small number of people?

[Beaker 817]

Is the policy evidence based or just anecdotal and based on the opinion of a small number of people?

It sounds like they just took the CoP guidance, and adopted it without question or variation.

[a-bothan-spy 81]

It sounds like they just took the CoP guidance, and adopted it without question or variation.

That is not the COP guidance...