PoliceOracle.com

Police Remuneration Changes Rubber Stamped

Police Remuneration Changes Rubber Stamped

Largest shake up of pay and pensions in a generation will go ahead, confirms Home Secretary.

Date - 30th January 2012
Courtesy of - Cliff Caswell - Police Oracle
10 Comments 10 Comments}

The largest shake up of police remuneration in a generation is to go ahead after the Home Secretary rubber stamped most of Tom Winsor’s Part I recommendations.

Theresa May endorsed the package of measures after they were considered by the Police Arbitration Tribunal. While ten of the 18 recommendations passed unchanged by the body, five were modified and there was no award made on three.

“We also wait to see what the Winsor Part Two report recommends and will fight to ensure that police are not financially disadvantaged any more than they are now.”

The Home Secretary also endorsed proposals to increase officer pension contributions highlighting that all officers would pay more despite opposition to the move.

As reported on PoliceOracle.com, the Government has claimed that the changes to the remuneration package will save in the region of £150 million per year.

But policing staff organisations have voiced dismay, with the Federation in particular claiming they will bring hardship to officers and deal a body blow to morale.

In a written ministerial statement, Mrs May said: “These reforms represent an important first step in modernising pay and conditions so they are fair to officers and taxpayers.

“They include redistributing pay to officers who work unsocial hours, abolishing ineffective post-related payments, suspending some elements of time served pay and improving managers’ ability to manage shift arrangements.

“The PAT recommended that a small number of recommendations should be deferred until Part II and has made longer-term recommendations on pay structures.

“We will consider these matters with Part II in line with the Reviewer’s principals.”

The Winsor recommendations accepted by the PAT include plans for the introduction of the Unsocial Hours Allowance, adapted variable shift arrangements and the suspension of bonus schemes for chief officers and superintendents.

However, the Tribunal also suggested that several of the recommendations should be modified, including two-year suspension of incremental change progression for all officers below the top of their pay scale.

The PAT proposed that the first three steps on the constables' scale should be excluded from the proposed suspension – although the move is unlikely to satisfy many officers.

Police Federation Chairman Paul McKeever said that members remained angry, particularly as the Staff Side of the PNB had tabled an equivalent table of savings “that did not result in many of our members experiencing disproportionate financial detriment”.

Speaking after the Mrs May’s statement, Mr McKeever emphasised: “We are pleased that the Home Secretary has honoured the Police Negotiating Board process and will ratify the decision of the Police Arbitration Tribunal.

"However, while we accept that the decision of the PAT is binding on both Sides of PNB, it does not mean that we're happy with the outcome. Whichever way you dress it up, this will mean serious financial hardship for police officers.

"Let us not forget, this Government is unduly targeting police officers. In addition to what amounts to a four-year public sector pay freeze and increased pension contributions, police officers are having to contend with a range of changes to terms and conditions; the result of which is effectively a pay cut.

Mr McKeever also branded the decision to increase pension contributions as a disappointment, particularly as officers did not have any rights to industrial action.

"We also wait to see what the Winsor Part Two report recommends and will fight to ensure that police are not financially disadvantaged any more than they are now."

Do you have an interesting news story? Contact the newsdesk on 01737 648 432
or alternatively get in touch via the contact form.

Categories and Tags

Anonymous Anonymous says...
Anonymous

Anonymous - Mon, 30 January 2012
Well Mr McKeever. I am a serving police officer and the mood of ther rank and file are for pulling out of the federation. What is the point of negotiating when you do not have anything to negotiate with. You use the same rhetoric which falls on deaf ears.
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Mon, 30 January 2012
HERE HERE!!!! Anonymous, I agree the Fed. 'A Toothless tiger!! I will need that £25 per month to put towards feeding my children, instead of putting it into the pockets of a 'I'll just lay back and take it, as long as I'm ok' organisation!!!
ReportReply

walsh999

walsh999 - Tue, 31 January 2012
Dear home secretary

When you cut your pay and increase your pension contributions, when you struggle to pay your mortgage then maybe I might show you a morsel of respect. Until then I will continue to put my life on the line on a daily basis for what in reality is a pittance compared to tube drivers. If we could strike we would bring this country to its knees! Even if we could we wouldn't, know why? It is because unlike you we have respect and pride in the office we hold. Shame on you!
ReportReply

andy

andy - Tue, 31 January 2012
As a retired officer who aquired a broken back and ruined life by a criminal act I feel that the risks taken by officers now and then to protect the public are not rewarded enough now, but to do the dirty on the now serving officers is disgraceful, shame on you Mrs. May. Tube drivers £44,000 yes and they are allowed to bring the country to it's knees. Officers are not allowed to take industrial action and would not do it if they could, but rewarded NO Shame on Goverment past and present for taking advantage on easy prey.

ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Tue, 31 January 2012
I can not believe the Federation have rolled over and had their bellies tiggled again by that horrid women. 3.25% increase in pension contributions starting 1st April, with pay freeze for at least 3 years - the incremement freeze loses me £3,000 over two years, but she is trying to butter this up with shift allowance for night working, officers will be about £20 more in pay packet in year one, but as pension contributions increase, we will find ourselves minus £100, with things costing more, there will be casualties, perhaps she should look at the Foreign and Commonweath Office employees who pay a meagre 3% - yes 3%!! Now we are going to pay 14.25% - does she not realise that people will not join the pension in the future and therefore the young won't be supplying the money for the old - very very limited thought processes in this decision - muppets.
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Tue, 31 January 2012
Once again, where were the rallies, what was the point of visiting MP and writing to them - Roll over Fed, roll over - what is the point of paying you contributions - we have been done - UNISON and have refused to agree to the Nurse and Teacher packages and increase in pension - but the police are once again suckered into a corner - there is no bright light -the alternative SPP was one of only 3 not agreed - funny that!!, the overnight 10% increase, will not even register in the paypacket and after 3 years of pension increase, the pay packet will be less than it is today. No increments, no pay rise for at least 2 & 3 years - I can see some police officers being stretched just too far, with no support.
ReportReply

Mark

Mark - Thu, 02 February 2012
7 years in and I can't wait to get out. I've had it up to my back teeth. I find it quite quaint how the old boys mention pride in the service; there is no pride any more chaps, it's been bashed out of us. Oh, there'll never be a problem recruiting new officers, but keeping good ones is going to be impossible. I'm off ASAP and until then I'm putting in minimum effort. I don't mean for Joe Public; I'll always do my best for them, but for the bosses? No. No courses, no 'would you mind changing your shift?', forget that from now on. And after 7 years of only ever going sick from injuries on duty, I'll be taking exactly the right amount of sick leave from now on. And no, I'm not frightened by threatening emails from bosses about having to explain in person why I've been off sick. HM government have used up all the good will they'll ever get from us.
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Thu, 02 February 2012
I am on 6 year pay point for the next 2 years and pension up. Federation subs? That will be going! And what happens after the pay freeze is over? Do I get my year 7 or year 9 pay rise? Those under ten years are getting a far bigger hit then those with more years? Has rent allowance gone?

It may concern absolutely nobody, but given the chance to go back to industry and earn £45K for not doing at alot, I would be straight out. The thousands spent on my training will all be gone.
The Home Office will not care if people leave, that will save them money. However, when the economy picks up and there are more jobs available many qualified experinced officers will be gone.
ReportReply

pdcourt

pdcourt - Fri, 03 February 2012
Just remeber that the Fed are watching their own backs. Do any of you sit in leather chairs and central heated offices ?
No ne took any notice when they rolled over on A19. Many of us complained.Everyone thought Oh well at least they are leaving us alone.
You were warned. Much like the unions of the 70's fed reps are looking after themselves.They are a bit wiser in that if we don't create a fuss perhaps they will leave us alone.
Dream on
ReportReply

Maverick22

Maverick22 - Tue, 13 March 2012
You can bet your 'bottom dollar' that the Fed will be up in Blacpool, at Liberty's, later in the year, spending your money on fancy food and drinks. I know many officers who are jacking in the Federation because they will need the extra cash when Show-Pony and Ms Malfoy has finished with us. Winsor 11 isn't going to make anyone very happy.
ReportReply