Lobby your North Yorkshire MP

Find out more

• Police News
• Federation News
• Winsor Review

Lobby your North Yorkshire MP

Officers are being urged to contact their MPs as the Federation campaign against the Winsor report and cuts to police funding reaches a critical stage.

On Tuesday 26th July 2011 a failure to agree on Winsor1 was registered at the Police Negotiating Board. This was exceptionally disappointing because there have been 10 Working Party meetings since the Winsor Recommendations were referred to the PNB by the Home Secretary.

Winsor part1contains 62 recommendations on pay. Amongst the most severe recommendations affecting the Federated Ranks are the following:

• Incremental pay is frozen for two years. This will have a significant effect on younger officers who may have well budgeted anticipated incremental rises into future family budgets. This could cause significant hardship for those officers. This is notable in that Winsor acknowledges that he cannot impose similar restrictions on police staff as they have contractual rights in this area. This certainly highlights his willingness to take advantage of a group of workers with no industrial rights.
• The abolition of Competency Related Threshold Payment. This will reduce officer pensions by £600 per year and their commutation lump sum by £3,800.
• Reduction in overtime remuneration. The purpose of overtime payments is not only to reward officers who have to work long hours but to also ensure that in the face of insatiable demand for policing services they are able to retain some semblance of work life balance and not abused by poor management practices. The value of overtime has fallen in recent years through more effective management of expenditure but the real fear here is that as overtime value is reduced officers will be expected to work longer hours as a cheaper cost option than employing more staff.
• The abolition of the Hertfordshire agreement. This widely misunderstood and is paid to officers who are away from home and “held in reserve” when stood down from operational duty. That is their freedom of movement when off duty is severely limited when off duty as they be re-called at any time. The recommend to recompense such limitations by payment of a £15 allowance is quite frankly insulting.
• Whilst he recommends the abolition of SPP he has recommended the introduction of an interim Expertise and Professional Accredited Allowance. We believe that whilst the allowance is lower than current SPP rates, and it is unclear who will get the award or at what rate, this at least provides a negotiating position unlike his other proposals.
• The introduction of an enhancement for working unsocial hours. There is much support for the introduction proper recognition for those working unsocial hour. Regrettably his proposals as they stand are extremely bureaucratic and do not amount to a proper shift allowance. I think they will quickly fall into disrepute and cause more anger than satisfaction.

The overall consequence of Winsor1 is that the majority of officers will be worse off despite the “spin” from Winsor. Even for those who appear to benefit he does not build in the impact of frozen increments.

The likely outcome is that a number of Police Officers will be significantly worse off as a consequence of these recommendations, coupled with an increase in pension contributions as highlighted below. For some this will lead to considerable hardship and an increase in their vulnerability to corrupt approaches from Serious and Organised Crime Groups.

As a consequence the Staff Side of PNB which represents all police officers up to and including chief officers from England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland acting in good faith in negotiations

Despite these negotiations the Official Side (OS) have steadfastly refused to make any movement from the Winsor Recommendations.

In an effort to show that we acknowledged that some savings were required and in order to protect what we deemed to be 'non-negotiable' Staff Side (SS) after a great deal of discussion and concession from the constituent parts agreed to formally propose the following (paraphrased for ease);

1) Temporary suspension of the Special Priority Payments for a period of 3yrs, which will realise £258million, which is £36million above the £222million identified by the Winsor Report over 2.5yrs beginning from September 2011.

2) The year on year savings from the housing replacement allowance have not been factored into the Winsor savings and this will accrue an additional £55million in savings by 2014.

3) Whist expressing concern re protecting the 'work-life balance' and recognising the OS's need to make savings, SS propose that 'directed overtime' remains at time and a 3 third and only 'casual overtime' be reduced to plain time. In agreeing this SS would expect the half hour disregard be removed. SS estimate this would produce a saving of between £57 - £105million over 2.5yrs depending on the management of overtime.

4) The suspension of the Supts & Chief Officeers bonuses for 2 yrs, saving £4million.

5) Incremental progression and access to CRTP be by way of satisfactory PDR. In the absence of this (PDR) progression would be automatic.

6) No payment for 'on call' allowance be introduced until Winsor Part II is published saving a further £31million. The above proposals would realise savings of £374 - £422million by 2014 compared to £387million within the Winsor Report.

These proposals on the understanding that;
a) CRTP is not removed.
b) The EPAA or unsocial hour allowance are not introduced,
c) There is no incremental pay freeze.

If the SS proposals were accepted, SS would also agree to the proposed two-year public sector pay freeze and a commitment of the OS to the introduction of a suitable uprating mechanism for police officers pay from September 2013.

These proposals were formally tabled at PNB. The OS response was that the proposals did not adequately address their clear ambitions to reform pay and conditions...and save a significant amount of money as soon as possible. Their 'one' concession was that the first increment on the Constables' pay scale is awarded on successful completion of their initial training and is not subject of the 'two year increment' freeze.

As you will agree that was not a big concession bearing in mind very few forces, if any are recruiting so no one would be getting it in any case.

As mentioned in the statement by Ian Rennie. You can read this by clicking here

If the SS proposals were accepted this would result in immediate savings of £65million between September and December 2011.

The OS rejected the SS proposal and there was a formal 'Failure To Agree' registered. Conciliation took place immediately via ACAS but this proved unsuccessful with neither side conceding any further ground.

The PNB Independent Chair therefore has formally put the following Winsor Recommendations before the 'Police Arbitration Tribunal' (PAT);

Rec 2 Unsocial shift allowance
Rec 5 VSA's
Rec 6 Casual Overtime
Rec 7 Rest Day working
Rec 8 Public Holidays
Rec 11 Mutual Aid
Rec 12 Proper Accommodation
Rec 13 Held in Reserve
Rec 20 Incremental Pay Freeze
Rec 29 CRTP
Rec 33 SPP's
Rec 34 EPPA
Rec 43 Replacement Allowance
Rec 44 On Call Allowance
Rec 45 Review of On Call Allowance
Rec 59 Return from Part-Time Working

There are a further few other recommendations, however those relate to either the Supts or Chief Officers.

The following 5 recommendations did reach 'agreement in principle' and these will be pursued through normal PNB discussions:

Rec 31 Team Recognition
Rec 46 Motor Vehicle Allowance
Rec 48 Materrnity Allowance
Rec 57 A19
Rec 58 Voluntary Exit Scheme

Although exact timescales have yet to be agreed it in anticipated that evidence will be called in September or October and thereafter the PAT will sit in late Autumn at the earliest.

Until such time as the PAT reports all current arrangements re SPP's, CRTP's, incremental progression, etc remain as per the current Police Regulations and Determinations.

As we hope you appreciate the SS have tried as far as possible to reach a negotiated settlement, however this has been impossible due to the OS's refusal to negotiate and hide between Winsor. Their decision to reject our offer confirms our view that this not about the money it is about the Government ideology. What is particularly disappointing is that ACPO and the APA sit on the OS with the Home Office and have been totally ineffectual in this process.

We continue to believe we have a strong case for the PAT and also believe that the Home Secretary will continue to abide by the PNB process and therefore not impose the Winsor Recommendations ahead of the PAT determination.

You will recall that in 2008 we had issues having won arbitration where the Home Secretary was not bound by that decision. At that time the Conservatives, when in opposition proposed that arbitration should be binding on the Home Secretary.

At the same time police officers in North Yorkshire are being faced with 20% cuts to the budget and falling officer numbers.

The Police Federation nationally has made repeated calls for a Royal Commission on policing. There is currently an Early DayMotion signed by amongst other, the chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, Keith Vaz calling for a Royal Commission on Policing.

The minutes of a recent meeting of Merseyside Police Authority had the following resolution:

“that Merseyside Police Authority formally adds its support to the Police Federation in its call for a Royal Commission into policing.”

We have called upon North Yorkshire Police Authority to do the same.

A Royal Commission is a major Government inquiry, and the last one to focus on policing took place more than 40 years ago. The Royal Commission on the Police was appointed by Royal Warrant on January 25 1960 under the chairmanship of Sir Henry Willink.

Two reports were presented to Parliament. The first, an interim report, came in November 1960 and the final report in May 1962. The reports were used to formulate the Police Act 1964.

At the time Willink recommended that the pay of a police constable should be increased by a maximum of 30 per cent, bringing the pay of a PC with 17 years’ service to £970 a year. The Government accepted the recommendation, and similar increases were negotiated for ranks above constable.

The report also recommended the amalgamation of very small police forces, the inclusion of magistrates on police authorities and new procedures for investigating complaints against the police. Most of the recommendations from the report were implemented by 1964.

In 2009, former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair called for a Royal Commission to be carried out to find ways to cut costs after saying policing was becoming ‘unaffordable’.

He wanted politicians to put aside their party differences in order to agree on what was now wanted from the police service. His call came as he criticised Conservative plans for elected officials to replace police authorities in England and Wales.

We believe that as we are all in this together a Royal Commission on Policing is something we can and should all be lobbying for.

To see the impact the funding crisis in the police service has had and is likely to have click on the following

Officer Strength 2011HMIC Adapting to AusterityVTP NYP 20110721

http://www.nypolfed.org.uk/police-and-federation-news/police-news/public-safetyjeopardised-by-cuts-and-reforms-police-chief-warns/

http://www.nypolfed.org.uk/police-and-federation-news/police-news/survey-reveals-police-in-north-yorkshire-fear-cuts-will-result-in-poor-public-service-and-increased-crime/

http://www.nypolfed.org.uk/police-and-federation-news/police-news/hmic-reportdemanding- times-the-front-line-and-police-visibility/

Responding to those latest developments in the crisis facing policing, Mark Botham chairman of North Yorkshire Police Federation said.

“I urge all our members to speak to their MPs and, if need be, form an orderly queue at their door. They may want to attend MPs’ surgeries with their shift. This is a fight we can play a major part in if all our members get involved.

“Officers need to decide this is important to them and let their MPs know how this will affect them and their families but let us not forget how these cuts will affect the communities we serve.”

Your colleagues locally, regionally and nationally need you and your family to:

• Write to your MP, if you haven’t already done so
• Write again to your MP, if they have already contacted them once
• Make sure you send them Royal Commission postcards
• Visit them at their surgery – taking a colleague or colleagues with them. Form a queue outside if necessary
• Email them – again and again, if they refuse any contact.

Mark Botham, Nigel Day and Mike Stubbs of North Yorkshire Federation, have already spoken to all but two of the North Yorkshire MPs (with the exception of Ann McIntosh and William Hague – who to date because of national commitments have been unable to meet with us) and have exchanged correspondence with all the MPs.

We need you our members, your friends and your families to play your part by lobbying your local MPs. The MPs’ details are as below.