NEWS
A CRISIS MEASURED IN MISSING DATA
New data shows most forces hold no or scant records on how long their officers are working and excessive hours worked. The PFEW says leaders’ failure to track fatigue is unlawful, unsafe and driving officers out of the job
The Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) is calling out chief constables for presiding over their “dangerous, unlawful and indefensible” failure to monitor whether officers are being driven beyond legal working limits with new data revealing that 60 per cent of forces do not hold even the basic data needed to protect their own workforce. The Federation, representing more than 145,000 rank and file officers, says the findings expose a “systemic blind spot” on fatigue, overwork and welfare at the very moment policing is experiencing record attrition, collapsing morale and a workforce stretched past breaking point. As a result, PFEW has now begun the process of issuing legally enforceable
08 | POLICE | APRIL | 2026
Health and Safety Notices of Improvement, warning chief constables that they may already be in breach of their statutory duties under the Working Time Regulations, and that failure to act will carry consequences.
hours, breaches, rest day disruption and exemptions, 26 forces admitted they could not provide any figures, claiming it would take “more than two days” to compile because no such force-wide information exists. Two forces, Surrey
“Working time is a frontline safety issue and a major public interest concern. If officers are routinely exhausted their decision-making will be affected.”
A NATIONAL FAILURE Under the Working Time Regulations, no employee should exceed an average of 48 hours per week over 17 weeks, unless they have formally opted out. Yet when PFEW asked all 43 forces for simple force-wide data on working
and Cleveland, went further stating they held no information at all relating to the question. Thirteen forces have not responded at all. Only Norfolk, Suffolk, Lincolnshire and Greater
Manchester Police were able to supply any data whatsoever. This means that well over half of forces are effectively operating blind when it comes to the most basic question imaginable in a safety-critical profession: Are your officers working dangerously
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
