What's New

Day of Action - 23rd January 2008 - London

The members of the Central Committee of the P.F.N.I. attended the Day of Action in London on the23rd January 2008 to represent the federated ranks of the P.S.N.I. at this National Protest Rally. Approximately 20,000+ officers from all corners of the UK participated, with the P.F.N.I. Representatives at the head of the march.

It took approximately 2 hours for the last of the officers to cross the start line. Along the way the officers received applause from the Public as a sign of support. At 10 Downing Street Stevie McCann (P.F.N.I. Secretary) along with Jan Berry (Chairman, Staff Side P.N.B.), John Francis (Staff Side Secretary), Joe Grant (Deputy Staff Side Secretary), Pat Stay (Supt. Assoc. Secretary) handed in a petition regarding the ongoing pay dispute. The march culminated with a rally in Westminster Hall.

Members of the P.F.N.I. took the opportunity to lobby our local M.P.'s, Lords, Shadow Secretary of State, Chairman of N.I. Select Committee and Mr Paul Goggins, Security Minister. Each took the opportunity to reinforce the message of the breach of trust by the Government regarding our pay award and negotiating mechanism.

OBJECTIVES OF THE DAY

1) Police Officers need fair, transparent and equitable pay arrangements.

2) In the absence of full industrial righs, arbitration must be binding on all parties and honoured by all.

3) The Home Secretary must honour the Independent Police Arbitration Tribunal decision in full.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The original pay deal

Since the late 1970s after an Inquiry by Lord Edmund-Davies, police pay has been increse annually on 1st September by an index that, amongst other things, seeks to ensure that in the absene of the right to take industrial action, officers' pay does not fall behind other groups of workers. Whilst the index has changed over the yers it has provided overall fair, not excessive, pay rises.

What was the pay offer for 2007/08?

In July last year, the Official Side of the Police Negotiating Board (PNB) offered 2.325% payable from 1st September 2007. This was a majority offer by the Official Side, with the Home Office indicating they would stage the payment. The Staff Side (representing all police officers) of PNB rejected this offer, and using an amended, fairer and more tranparent indext of private and public sector worker salaries, put forward a counter claim of 3.94%.

Why put forward an alternative pay claim?

The alternative claim of 3.94% tabled by the Staff Side of PNB includes an element of compensation for the move from a private sector index to a public sector index at the most disadvantageous time i.e. when public sector average increases are falling and private sector increases are rising. Previously the index used was the median of private sector pay, which in 2007 would have produced a 3.39% increase. Staff Side sought to adopt a weighted average rather than the median, reflecting more fairly the number of workers covered by the awards included.

Why must we fight for a fair deal?

• The Police regularly face danger in the course of their duties.
• In certain circumstances they are expected to put themselves at risk in order to protect members of the public and property.
• Police Officers are required to present themselves for duty when ordered to so so, they cannot refuse.
• They have restrictions placed on their private lives and business interests, as do members of their family.
• They are prevented by law from being members of a trade union.
• They are prevented by law from taking part in any form of industrial action.
• Police Officers exercise a substantial number of statutory and common law powers including the power of forcible arrest on suspicion.
• They are accountable for actions, or inactions, both on and off duty.
• They are expected to deal with incidents wven when off duty.
• Whilst aspects of the police role can be compared with other jobs, the demands and requirements of the office of constable cannot be compared with any other occupation.

Why is the principle of indexation so important for Police Officers' pay?

• In the absence of the right to strike it compensates for the lack of bargaining strength.
• It has delivered nearly 30 years of harmonious industrial relations.
• Since 1994 it has been based on a representative sample of non-manual private sector pay settlements.
• The private-sector index is transparent and considered fair.
• It has provided fair, not excessive, annual pay increases.
• It is trusted by police officers to be fair.
• It enables police officers to undertake their duties with confidence of fair treatment.

CURRENT CLIMATE

How has this dispute come about?

Last year there was a failure to agree on the proposed award of 2.325% at an extraordinary meeting of the Police Negotiating Board and the matter was referred to conciliation, where both sides of the PNB again failed to reach agreement and the matter was then referred to arbitration. At the independent Police Arbitration Tribunal, the panel recommended a figure of 2.5% from September 1st. Arbitration is binding on both sides, the Home Secretary is required to ratify the award for it to be implemented in law.

What is the problem?

This is the first occasion the Home Secretary has failed to ratify a police pay arbitration award. The Home Secretary can choose to ratify the award or impose an alternative pay award if she can demonstrate that it is a matter of utmost national importance. The argument given for not ratifying the arbiters' decision was the need to keep inflation down and to keep police pay in line with a 2% public sector pay policy.

There are at least five flaws/anomalies to this argument:

• Failure to recognise unique restrictions placed on police.
• Delivers lower than apparent public pay policy (1.9% not 2%).
• Waste of taxpayers money undertaking superfluous negotiations with decision already made.
• Decision makes police officers, the goup with less bargaining rights than others, the worst affected group of workers.
• Lastly, and most grating is the decison to honour in full and back date the pay for Scottish Police, and that Police Staff, including PCSOs, have been awarded 2.5%.

Have we been willing to compromise?

Yes. The Police Federation never wanted this situation to arise. We understand that in any negotiation there needs to be some give and take. During these negotiations we agreed to adopt a public sector facing index for this pay award. We have abided by the rules of arbitration and believe the Home Secretary must do the same. We remain willing to discuss ways of reaching agreement and we have written to both the Prime Minister and Home Secretary offering to meet to resolve this dispute.

Why is the Police Federation voting on whether officers want the right to strike?

It is illegal for police officers to take any form of industrial action. For nearly a centruy that is what has set officers apart from all other workers in the public sector. Many officers have said if the Government wish to treat us like all other workers, then perhaps we should have the same employment rights. It was therefore decided that the Police Federation will hold a ballot of the 140,000 members to ask the question - 'In the absence of binding arbitration, do you want the Police Federation to lobby for full industrial rights for police officers?' It is intended that the ballot will take place at the end of February.

In a further development the Staff Side of the Police Negotiating Board have initiated civil proceedings by way of a judicial review regarding the decision of the Home Secretary to fail to implement the recommendation of the independent Police Arbitration Tribunal in full.

Stevie McCann
Secretary - P.F.N.I.