Page 15 - Alive January 2016 Newsletter Flip Book

We are concerned that some forces are classing officers as casual users, when they should be classed as essential. We are lobbying chief officers to have the rates applied consistently.
does the PFeW support the away from home overnight allowance?
yes, the PFEW supports the consistent application of this allowance. This allowance is intended to provide fair compensation to officers unable to return home, for the difficulties that may arise (e.g. additional costs, childcare, services paid for that cannot be utilised in their absence).
However, there have been difficulties with the implementation of the allowance. Poor drafting of the Determinations has resulted in differing interpretations across forces.
Why are some colleagues being paid this allowance, and others not?
The Police Arbitration Tribunal in 2011 made it clear that this allowance should be paid. However, when the Determinations were drafted by the Home Office in March 2012, it contained new restrictions, reflecting ACPO’s desire to limit payment. This has caused inconsistencies across forces. A revised Determination in 2015 has only made matters worse. The PFEW and PSAEW have raised this many times with the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and at the Police Consultative Forum. There have also been successful legal challenges taken.
Why has the PFeW included evidence of the annual allowance in their submission?
The PFEW has included this because we believe it is fundamentally unfair that officers in their final years of service, who are promoted, can incur tax liabilities that largely cancel out the financial benefit of promotion. This is having an impact on officers’ willingness to be promoted. It is not in the public interest for there to be a disincentive for the best officers to be promoted
To read the full submission see our website
www.bedspolfed.org
To read the complete Frequently Asked
Questions see our website
“submission date. Given the number of issues from officers’ representative bodies. www.bedspolfed.org
employees have seen their pay devalued. But this situation is starting to change, with the private sector gaining.
We want to see officers fairly rewarded for what they do. And we want to see pay that is sufficient to attract officers capable of delivering high standards of public service.
How did the PFeW come to this decision?
The figure was derived after analysis of all the key indicators that pay review bodies normally take into account, these being:
l economic data regarding inflation and
pay increases in all sectors
l data on the numbers of officers recruited
and retained (as pay bodies are keen that pay is set to maintain recruiting and retention)
l data on morale: 70 per cent of officers in our survey said morale is low
l information about changes to the nature of the role: this included information about increased workloads due to cuts and restructures; changes in crime, including a need for sophisticated investigative skills; and expansion in roles due to reduction in partner agency capacity.
The information was made available to the Interim National Board which, led by the general secretary, debated what figure should be recommended in our submission to the PRRB.
Why were rank and file officers not consulted with this decision, as it affects them directly?
We canvass members’ overall views on pay and related matters via a pay survey run each year in April – May. All officers have an opportunity then to voice their overall viewpoint.
During the year, the Interim National Board (INB) and Interim National Council (INC) feed member concerns back to the HQ.
With regard to consulting on the detail of the PRRB submission, there are a number of reasons why members are not directly involved.
Firstly, the information that is needed to arrive at a recommendation is complex, and must be up to date and timely. Secondly, the detailed remit letter from PRRB is only sent to the PFEW a few weeks before the
raised, these timescales are challenging. The INB and the INC, as the key elected representatives, act on behalf of all members during this time.
logistically, attempting to involve every single member in the detailed consideration at this time would be impossible.
does the PFeW think that those officers who are in specialist roles should be paid more? The PFEW believes the pay system should support the service that is representative of the public served, with a system that attracts and retains officers of differing genders, ethnicity, and age groups; pay should be fair, and be felt by officers to be fair; it should be designed based on need, and on what works to attract and retain capable officers. Any differentiation should be based on an objective evaluation. Pay should reflect responsibilities and workload, but it should also facilitate the need for officers to be deployed across a spectrum of activities.
Why are over-time rates for Bank Holiday working being considered?
The PRRB has a rolling programme to consider all allowances, over a three-year period. In this year, the PRRB is considering over-time rates for bank holidays, motor vehicle allowance, and away from home and overnight allowance.
We are concerned, however, that the focus on bank holiday working is, at least in part, because of the need to police large events on bank holidays – e.g. the Notting Hill carnival. The PFEW has argued that forces and Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) can, and should, recover costs for policing from the organisers of large scale events. This is especially the case where organisers have not made adequate stewarding provision.
What is your view on the current motor vehicle allowance (MVA) that is paid to officers?
We are concerned on two points: the mechanism for setting MvAs, and the ways in which forces interpret the categories of MvAs.
Currently, MvA rates are set by local government employers. We believe it unfair that rates are set by a body that has no input
OuR ANAlySIS OF ECONOMIC DATA SuGGESTS THAT OFFICERS – lIKE MANy IN THE PuBlIC SECTOR – HAvE SEEN THEIR PAy DECREASE IN vAluE By ABOuT 13.6 PER CENT SINCE 2010.
AT THE SAME TIME, PRIvATE SECTOR EMPlOyEES HAvE SEEN THEIR PAy DEvAluED. BuT THIS SITuATION IS STARTING TO CHANGE, WITH THE PRIvATE SECTOR GAINING.
15