Job Titles (5172_14)

Request

Please supply a list of all job titles at your force.

 

Examples of a ‘job title’ could include: forensic submissions intelligence clerk, occupational health counsellor or internal marketing officer.

 

Please indicate whether these roles are currently occupied and how many employees have the title.

Response

As at 17 July 2014

The total sum of establishment (FTE) = 11,395

The total Sum of Vacant (FTE) = 1,061

 

Attached is a list of our current job titles.

 

To confirm whether each role is occupied and by the number of employees is exempt by virtue of

 

Section 31 (1) (a) (b) (Law enforcement)

 

This exemption and explanatory notes are shown here:

 

http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/docs/advice-centre/foi/exemptions.pdf

 

 

In line with the above, I am required to complete a Prejudice Test/Public Interest Test (PIT)

 

Reason For Applying The Exemption

 

Harm

 

Although overall Police Service Strength is published by the home Office:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-workforce-england-and-wales

 

Figures for specific specialist departments are not published. Disclosing details of the strength of individual specialist units would provide persons intent on criminal activities, with invaluable information as to the tactical capability of the Force in those areas. Thus allowing them to adjust their own tactics accordingly.

 

Considerations Favouring Disclosure

 

Police Forces need to be properly equipped in order to meet the demands placed upon them. This information could go some way towards reassuring the public that the West Midlands Police Force is adequately prepared in all areas.

 

Considerations Favouring Non-Disclosure

 

The release of information disclosing the exact capabilities of West Midlands Police would furnish individuals or groups with the opportunity to fully understand the police capacity and therefore be more effective in carrying out criminal activities. It is the duty of the police to protect the public from all criminal attacks. There is evidence that criminals use information to change tactics and method of attack. Therefore the safety of the public could be compromised and inappropriate release could cause damage to the service and the community.

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

For a public interest test, issues that favour release need to be measured against issues that favour non-disclosure. The public interest is not what interests the public, or a particular individual, but what will be the greater good, if released, to the community as a whole.

 

We recognise that the public interest in being open and transparent is of great importance to all and release of information may assist in the public being more aware of the work that the police are carrying out. However, while the public interest considerations favouring disclosure are noted, this must be balanced with the impact any release would have on the operational capability of the police.

 

Because the Freedom of Information Act is ‘applicant blind’, any information released under the Act is available to everyone. It is well documented that criminals will use every advantage they can gain to successfully carry out their criminality.

 

Therefore it is my view that the perceived public safety derived from non-disclosure is of greater importance than the perceived public confidence derived from disclosure. In this case, at this time, it would not be in the public interest to release this information. West Midlands Police will not disclose information that could harm the public or that could compromise the safety and operational effectiveness of its officers.

Attachments

5172_attachment_1

Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed