About 120 police staff are under investigation after 30,000 alcohol breath tests were 'falsely or erroneously recorded'. Photo / RNZ, Alex Perrotet
By Sam Sherwood of RNZ
One of New Zealand’s leading employment lawyers says she’s never seen anything on the same scale as the investigation into 120 police officers who were involved in falsifying alcohol breath tests across the country.
Barbara Buckett says the number of staff and the fact it occurred across the country points to wider problems within the organisation.
“There must be something there that police have to look to in terms of its own leadership and its own culture within the organisation, because it needs to ask some hard questions about accountability, consistency and environment which contributed to the behaviour, if it’s to this extent.
“That’s what seems to be unfathomable, the number and the geographical spread of it.”
RNZ earlier revealed about 120 staff were under investigation after 30,000 alcohol breath tests were “falsely or erroneously recorded”.
The falsified results were only discovered after police built a new algorithm to analyse the data, as the devices themselves could not distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate tests.
Acting Deputy Police Commissioner Jill Rogers spoke to Checkpoint on Tuesday about the falsified tests. She confirmed none of the staff had been stood down, and did not rule out criminal investigations.
Buckett told RNZ the conduct did prima facie constitute serious misconduct which brought into play grounds for disciplinary action up to and including summary dismissal.
“Because it strikes at the heart of trust and confidence required in the employment relationship. However, the caveat is it will require a fair process, and every officer’s case will have to be assessed individually considering intent, context and any mitigating factors.”
She said the rarity of the case was “in its numbers”.
“You’ll get people, you know, falsifying or doing things with records that they should not otherwise do. I don’t think that’s necessarily in itself uncommon.
“And there are, you know, breaches and blips occur, particularly in the public sector area, from time to time, but not on this scale of things. I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before, and I’ve been around a while.”
Buckett said there appeared to be a “deeper issue” than individual misconduct, and raised questions of “systemic failings”.
Asked on Tuesday what reason there would be for falsifying tests, other than meeting targets, Rogers said police were working to identify the rationale and said it may be that staff “exceeded the numbers that they’ve legitimately done for reasons of making it look like they’re doing work that they haven’t done”.
Buckett said if the conduct was as “blatant” as Rogers suggested, then it would confirm “intention to deceive or to falsify”.
“That would breach duties of good faith and honesty owed by employees to the employer, especially in a public service role where the threshold for that is higher but that’s what they’d have to be demonstrated, that it wasn’t for some other reason or some other understanding, and that’s obviously what the investigation is going to have to look at, the rationale for this and why.”
The fact that none of the staff had been stood down seemed to be a signal from police that they weren’t taking it as a “higher serious level”, Buckett said.
“If you’re keeping them on and employed, then that’s an indication that if it, even if it is misconduct, it hasn’t been that serious for you to see it as a total destruction of the trust and the requisite trust and confidence and that you’ve accepted that the employment relationship can still survive, notwithstanding.”
If any staff were to be dismissed, it would “permanently and possibly irretrievably” affect their future employment as they would have to declare it in a future job, especially in roles involving public trust and law enforcement.
“I doubt whether they would get another job with this sort of background or having lost their employment for these reasons within the state sector in particular, and certainly if anything involved a security clearance, I couldn’t see that happening either if you’ve got a sort of a dishonesty against your name, particularly in relation to falsification of documentation and public record.”
Employment law specialist Jennifer Mills told RNZ that police were in a “high-trust position”.
“Therefore, falsifying alcohol breath tests is likely to be considered a breach of the high level of trust placed in the New Zealand Police and a breach of the New Zealand Police’s values and ideals [at the very least].”
She said the possible consequences would depend on whether the staff deliberately falsified the tests.
“However, given that almost 120 staff are affected, we would assume that it is more likely to be considered an unintentional act. In this case, the likely consequence would be a misconduct matter that warrants a warning, performance plan and/or additional training to prevent future issues.”
- RNZ