PC who took job on sick leave guilty of misconduct

PC Mark Logan retired in December 2023 after 20 years of service

A police officer who worked as an ambulance driver while on sick leave has been found guilty of gross misconduct.

Former PC Mark Logan retired from Hertfordshire Constabulary on 15 December 2023, however, a misconduct hearing ruled that he would have been sacked if he had not already resigned.

Mr Logan did not appear at the hearing on 23 July and had "voluntarily absented himself".

The panel concluded his behaviour was "intentional, deliberate, planned and dishonest" as he had failed to disclose he was working for another emergency service.

The hearing heard how Mr Logan started working for an employment agency in February 2022 before starting work as an ambulance driver on his rest days.

However, he had not disclosed this to the force despite being required to notify the Chief Constable of a business interest and obtain permission to engage in additional work outside of policing in accordance with the Police Regulations 2003.

'Genuine oversight'

In May 2023, Mr Logan reported sick for work and took sick leave from his duties.

Instead, he worked as an ambulance driver on 22 occasions in June, July and August of 2023, accumulating a total of 75 hours of work.

During those three months he earned about £3,645 in addition to the sick pay he received from Hertfordshire Constabulary.

In regards to a notice of investigation he was served on 7 September 2023, Mr Logan, said: "I did not believe a business interest was necessary for this, as this work was for another Emergency Service.

"This is a genuine oversight on my part, I have previously submitted a Business Interest for an exotic fish company I was involved in so this was an honest mistake rather than an attempt to deceive anyone as I believed I understood the policy."

The investigating officer said there was no record of a business interest being submitted for his involvement in an exotic fish business or his ambulance work.

Mr Logan said he had experienced a "really poor experience in the workplace" where his role "significantly" affected childcare and apologised for not submitting a business interest form.

He did not agree that he had engaged in discreditable conduct because it was not something he "purposefully, deceitfully went out to do" and did not think there was anything wrong with being off sick and in paid employment somewhere else.

The panel concluded his behaviour crossed the threshold for gross misconduct.