Jump to content

  •  

Photo

NEWS:Winsor II: Home Sec Ratifies Tribunal Ruling


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
10 replies to this topic

#1 Black Rat

Black Rat

    UKPoliceOnline Admin

  • Admin
  • 7,288 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:IT and Computing, Website Design, Martial Arts (Karate) and DJ'ing

Posted 15 January 2013 - 09:37 PM

Government's reform programme is on track and proving successful, says Theresa May.Posted Image
 
The Home Secretary has maintained that the government’s reform package is “working” after ratifying the Police Arbitration Tribunal’s ruling on the Winsor II proposals.
 
In delivering a written ministerial statement to colleagues in the House of Commons, Theresa May maintained that it was imperative “that the police are able to benefit” from the latest tranche of recommendations as soon as possible.
 
She confirmed that the process of amending the Police Regulations would begin immediately – and the government would be unrelenting in its programme to introduce reforms “that are both fair to officers and the taxpayer”.
 
The acceptance of the eight recommendations means that – as of April –the starting salary for new police constables will now be cut from £21,000 to £19,000 a year.
 
Competency Related Threshold Payments will also be phased out between 2013 and 2016 – and negotiations over whether compulsory severance should be introduced for officers will continue in the Police Negotiating Board until July.
 
Mrs May commended the independent Winsor review for “modernising management practices and developing the vital link between pay and professional skills”.
 
She added: “The development of the skills agenda is an essential part of both modernising pay and conditions and our programme of reform and developing professionalism.
 
“Existing police pay and conditions were designed more than 30 years ago, which is why we asked Tom Winsor to carry out his independent review.
 
“The reform programme is working – crime is falling and public confidence is high. It is imperative that the police are able to benefit from further reforms as soon as possible and I will therefore begin the process of amending the Police Regulations and determinations to implement the Tribunal’s recommendation.”
 
The ratified Winsor recommendations are –
 
Recommendation 54 – Proposed payscale for new entrant constables.
Tom Winsor had proposed a shorter payscale that would include a new, lower starting salary of £19,000 for recruits. This was supported by the Official Side of the PNB, made up of the ACPO, the Home Office and the Association of Police Authorities.
Staff Side, made up of the Police Federation, Superintendents’ Association and the Chief Officers’ Staff Association, had suggested an alternative scale, starting at £21,000. Both sides suggested a salary of £36,519 at the top pay point. The Official Side’s proposed payscale was accepted.
 
Recommendation 112 – The introduction of a national on-call allowance
Mr Winsor had suggested that a national on-call allowance for the federated ranks should be introduced from April 2013. The amount of the allowance would be £15 for each daily occasion of on-call after the officer in question has undertaken 12 on-call sessions in the year beginning on April 1.
Although the arbiters accepted that there was a case for introducing a national on-call allowance “at this juncture”, the recommendation was modified to remove the requirement for the 12 on call sessions.
 
Recommendation 83 – Competence Related Threshold Payments
Mr Winsor suggested these should be abolished by April 2013 at the latest, and all accrued CRTP payments up to that date should be made on a pro-rated basis.
Following representations from the two sides, arbiters felt the timeframes for this measure were too severe given the financial constraints facing officers. They suggested that a phased withdrawal needed to take place over three years until 2016, and the proposal should be modified.
 
Recommendation 74 – The payment of regional allowances
Mr Winsor said that chief constables should be given discretion to pay regional allowances up to the current maximum level, as set out in Regulation 34 of the Police Regulations 2003, and the discretion to apply eligibility criteria based on location and performance.
However, the tribunal believed that performance “should not be intertwined with location” and could not accept this part of the proposal. It was therefore modified, enabling chief constables and the Met commissioner to be given discretion to vary levels of payment.
 
Recommendation 94 – Interim Expertise and Professional Accreditation Allowance
Mr Winsor suggested this should be introduced from April 2013. He said it would reward qualifying officers for the skills they use in the four stated priority functions – neighbourhood policing, public order, investigation and firearms.
Under the proposal, EPAA would be fixed at £600 per year and paid monthly. It would be removed when an officer left the qualifying role.
The arbiters felt there was “considerable merit” in having “some form of systematic assessment” of the demands of officer jobs that would provide the basis of reform of pay structures.
 
But they felt it “disappointing” that the Winsor Review did not develop this idea. They noted that that the proposal was an interim measure, due to be succeeded by the Specialist Skills Threshold Payment. They rejected the move on the basis of the Staff Side’s “persuasively argued reservations”.
 
Recommendation 46, 47 and 48 – Compulsory Severance
Mr Winsor had suggested that the Police Regulations 2003 should be amended to create a system of compulsory severance for police officers with less than full pensionable service from April 2013. All of these recommendations were linked to this issue.
Arbiters accepted redundancy as “a common feature of the employment landscape” – and pointed out that the exemption of police was difficult to sustain in the current economic climate.
 
But the PAT said that the “urgency for the approval and introduction of this measure” demanded by the Official Side of the Police Negotiating Board (PNB) was overstated – and that talks should continue until July next year.
No decision was made on each of these recommendations

Click here to view the article

#2 apg91

apg91

    I'm New !

  • Newbie Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 16 January 2013 - 10:51 PM

I'd welcome this, I want to do the job regardless of the salary and it would give more people who actually want to do the job more opportunity to do so.

#3 Sectioned Detection

Sectioned Detection

    UKPOLICEONLINE Master

  • Senior Resident Members
  • 2,572 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 16 January 2013 - 11:23 PM

How do you work that out when they're demanding at least 3 a levels for a start? And since when has a DECREASE in pay INCREASE the amount of people want to go a job?

#4 Altair

Altair

    UKPOLICEONLINE Veteran

  • Police Service (Officer)
  • 1,715 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:47 AM

I fail to see how we are benefiting from all of those decisions??

 

Clearly this is a prolonged attack on the police and once they finish carving us up then comes the teachers and other public sector workers.

 

The fact that she is so cheeky enough to say these cuts are in the interests of the tax payer is laughable considering over 500 billion quid is being given to other countries for aid.

 

Call me cynical but I find it a bit strange that after the Met Police look into the MPs expenses scandal (many of which were caught out and escaped punishment but it'd be fraud if it was you or me) that all of a sudden there's a shift to "reform" the police.

 

I can't wait until this lot are out of 10 downing street and Labour are back to be honest, i'll even hold the door for all of them on the way out.

 

Hopefully within the next coming government or so things will change for the better...and if not then i'm certain many of us will simply transfer to another country and record numbers of cops will disappear never to be recruited again.

 

This clear bullying and attacking of the police is just sick in my opinion. They pick us because we are an easy target due to having no industrial rights and no real power as they can ignore the Federation all day long and get their own way. 

 

And then I read that the MPs want a salary increase... 



#5 apg91

apg91

    I'm New !

  • Newbie Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:41 PM


How do you work that out when they're demanding at least 3 a levels for a start? And since when has a DECREASE in pay INCREASE the amount of people want to go a job?
. Less people applying for the jobs purely because of the money. Higher chance of people who actually want to do the job regardless of the pay cuts

#6 Rudi

Rudi

    UKPOLICEONLINE Member

  • Resident Members
  • 142 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 January 2013 - 02:39 PM

apg91 in my humble opinion it's because of people like you they are able to screw me over.

#7 Sectioned Detection

Sectioned Detection

    UKPOLICEONLINE Master

  • Senior Resident Members
  • 2,572 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 17 January 2013 - 03:33 PM

Flawed logic. Ever hear of the phrase "pay peanuts you get monkeys" those with more experience or or qualifications (which is what Winsor wants) will pass on the opportunity and go to a better paid job. Just because somebody is desperate to join doesn't mean they're the best person for the job!

#8 apg91

apg91

    I'm New !

  • Newbie Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 17 January 2013 - 03:56 PM

Well my point is if someone decides they don't want to do the job now because it pays less money, they wernt the right person for the job and were applying for the money and not for the right reasons

#9 SimonT

SimonT

    UKPoliceOnline Staff

  • Moderators
  • 7,129 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hampshire
  • Interests:police, climbing

Posted 17 January 2013 - 04:01 PM

As much as its nice to apply for a job for the right reasons you still need to be paid.

The sacrifices of being a police officer are many, varied and unique. We need skilled and capable people to give good service.

 

If we stop attracting quality people it will harm the service as a whole and as much as people may want to be police officers and are happy to be police officers that doesnt mean they should be. Unless the wages are so low that we have no choice but to hire them as qualified candidates are doing something else. 



#10 Rudi

Rudi

    UKPOLICEONLINE Member

  • Resident Members
  • 142 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 January 2013 - 05:47 PM

Well my point is if someone decides they don't want to do the job now because it pays less money, they wernt the right person for the job and were applying for the money and not for the right reasons

Being a police officer is a job. I do the job to pay the bills. If money were not an issue then I wouldn't do the job. If the job did not pay enough then I would find another job that did. I suggest if you don't need the money then join as a special and save the taxpayer a few quid.

Are you married with kids? Do you have a mortgage and bills to pay? Would you be happy to see your family go without just because you love your job?

#11 Altair

Altair

    UKPOLICEONLINE Veteran

  • Police Service (Officer)
  • 1,715 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 January 2013 - 08:58 AM

Well my point is if someone decides they don't want to do the job now because it pays less money, they wernt the right person for the job and were applying for the money and not for the right reasons

 

The thing you don't realise is that this isn't just a huge chunk out of a new recruits salary, this is yet another attack on the police. No more double time, no decent overtime if you have to deal with something off duty, higher pension contributions (we already paid more than anyone else) for less pension lump sum and amount, higher retirement age, possibility to force people into retirement, higher working age meaning you have to work longer to get your already carved up pension...the list is endless.

 

The person who made this "report" made up officers names as research and managed to get away with it and now got a cushy job number out of it despite him being "impartial".

 

The starting pay is part of a bigger picture. We were promised a decent salary and pension for the dangerous and unique job we do which reflected what things we face day to day. These promises have been dropped and this is all our point.


Edited by Altair, 19 January 2013 - 08:59 AM.





0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users