Reproduced in full below is
the General Secretary's latest update on 'Pay and Conditions'. The Joint Central Committee is scheduled to
meet 5th and 6th March with the Joint Branch Board's
Annual General the following week.
Members concerns about the Home Secretary's intemperate comments are
understandable and, as can be noted, are being responded to by national officials. I shall ensure that you receive timeous
information on developments.
JOHN B FINNIE, JBB Secretary
27th February
2002
"PAY AND CONDITIONS
In this Bulletin, I summarise the events at the PNB
meetings held on Monday 25th February 2002 and make some comments about recent
media coverage.
PNB Meetings 25 February 2002
At the meeting of the PNB Full Board, the results of
the membership consultation exercises held throughout the UK were reported. The
full results for Scotland were circulated to you in PNB Bulletin February 2002
- Number Two. Across the UK the results
were:
Scotland For
5.83% Against 94.07%
England & Wales For
9% Against 91%
Northern Ireland For
10.8% Against 89.2%
UK Total For
8.5% Against 91.5%
Based on these results, the Staff Side of the PNB Full
Board voted to reject the Heads of Agreement package (HOA).
At the Full Board meeting, the Official Side reported
that each of its component parts would support the HOA. In addition and on the
second proviso relating to the HOA, the Official Side said it had received
assurances about the Home Secretary's position on sufficient finance being made
available to pay for the package. Specifically, it was reported that if the HOA
were to become an agreement of the PNB, he would argue for the extra money in
the forthcoming bid process for the Comprehensive Spending Review.
In turn, the Staff Side reported the results of the
consultation exercises and rejected the HOA. The Staff Side also expressed its
concern and listed its complaints about the Home Secretary's actions in
relation to the negotiations.
The Independent Chairman of the PNB then formally
declared a "failure to agree" and said the process would now move to
conciliation which would begin on Monday 4th March 2002.
At the conclusion of the PNB Full Board meeting, the
PNB Federated Ranks Committee met. The Staff Side reminded the Committee that
this whole process had started with the Staff Side's 12% pay claim (4% over 3
years in addition to the annual index) and said that as the HOA had now been
rejected, it would like an answer from the Official Side on the 12% claim. The
Official Side rejected the claim, the Independent Chairman recorded a
"failure to agree", and this claim will now go to conciliation. The
Sides agreed that the HOA and the 12% pay claim were linked and that both could
be discussed at the conciliation meeting on Monday 4th March 2002. Conciliation will be conducted by the
Independent Chairman of the PNB going back and forth between working groups of
the two Sides exploring whether there is any room for movement on their
positions.
As I have previously explained, if conciliation fails,
the matter moves to Arbitration. At the meeting on 25th February, it
was acknowledged that there would have to be a debate and eventual agreement
about what could be put to arbitration if conciliation failed. I last addressed
this question in PNB Bulletin - January
2002 - Number Two and at that time informed you that the elements of the HOA
package could not go to arbitration because they had been discussed in
"without commitment" discussions in a Working Party. This has since
changed with the HOA package being recorded in the Standing Committees of the
PNB. One of a number of problems with this is that the HOA package contains
"non-negotiable" matters and these cannot be subjected to
arbitration. It now appears that the negotiable issues within the package might
go to arbitration. If conciliation on the 12% claim fails it is clear that this
can go to arbitration.
On timescale, it is likely that the conciliation
process will be complete by the end of March. If arbitration proves necessary,
it is likely that this will take place within a few weeks of that.
The Home Secretary's Comments
You may have seen some comments attributed to the Home
Secretary David Blunkett following the announcement of the results of the
consultation exercises. A selection of these comments are detailed below:
"I believe that everyone who wants to see a
reformed and modernised police service will be disappointed that once again the
Police Federation have sought to block change."
"I know that the rank and file police officers,
who so often do a superb job against the odds, were either unaware or were
misled about the true nature of the rewards for reform which are on the table."
"The Police Federation signed up to the Heads of
Agreement deal but then made no recommendation, had no campaign and offered
little explanation of it. This vote is
therefore not unexpected."
"the Police Federation have been at the forefront
of resisting change for decades."
It will come as no surprise to you that I think these
statements are complete nonsense and a very poor attempt to 'spin'. As you
know, each officer in Scotland was sent a complete copy of the Heads of
Agreement package along with updates and explanations expressed in completely
unbiased terms. You were advised that
the package would affect officers in different ways and asked to express your
view in light of your own circumstances. There is absolutely no question of you
being "unaware" or "misled". If the Home Secretary and his
advisors really think that the Federations could persuade police officers to
vote against a 'good deal' then they really know very little about the police!
The Home Secretary knows very well that the HOA package
was produced at his instigation on an incredibly tight timescale. He knows that
the package was described by both Sides of the PNB and presented to their
memberships as "the best that can be achieved in negotiations within the
time limits under which the PNB has been operating". He knows that from the very start of the
work on his instructions, the Federations said that this would have to be
subject to ratification following consultation with the membership. He knows
that throughout the process the Federations explained to him and his advisors
that they would present the package as a decision for each member to take and
that we would neither campaign for or against the package. He also knows, that
throughout the process, the Staff Side consistently told the Official Side and
Home Office representatives at every meeting that elements of the package such
as reduced overtime rates would be entirely unacceptable. It would seem that
the Home Secretary simply cannot accept that the HOA package has been rejected
by 91.5% of the federated ranks in the UK because it was unacceptable to them.
Industrial Action
You may have seen media comments on the question of
the police and industrial action recently. As you know, the police cannot take
any form of industrial action. This is simply one of the restrictions placed on
our working and private lives in the 'office of constable.' Police officers
generally accept this restriction in return for fair and workable pay and
conditions and a fair and workable negotiating mechanism. The PNB generally
meets that criteria. We participate in the negotiating process in a positive
fashion and accept that when the PNB cannot agree on any particular issue that
independent arbitration will come up with a decision which is binding on both
Sides. As you know, and as you can confirm by reading back through the PNB
Circulars, you will see that 'some we win' and 'some we lose'. On a very few
occasions in the past, the government has not accepted a PNB Agreement or an
Award of the Police Arbitration Tribunal as it is entitled to do. It is
generally accepted that a government will only do this on a matter of the
"utmost national importance", and while this is never satisfactory,
again, police officers generally accept that this is part of their employment
conditions.
In this 'round' of negotiations, the actions of the
Home Secretary have severely tested the belief that the PNB is a "fair and
workable" negotiating system. There is anger and frustration and a desire
to look carefully at our 'conditions of service'. In Scotland, two Joint Branch
Boards have submitted Motions on industrial action and these will be discussed
at out Annual Conference in April. In
England and Wales, the Metropolitan Police Federation have decided to examine
the Human Rights Act in relation to the employment conditions of police
officers. The Staff Side will also be examining all of the legislation that
controls our conditions of service and negotiating system.
I think all of this is
perfectly understandable and appropriate in the circumstances and I will
continue to update you on these issues. My own desire is for the issues
currently on the table at the PNB, the HOA package and the 12% claim, to be
resolved through the mechanisms of the PNB as they should be. If they cannot be
resolved through conciliation, then arbitration will decide. The Home Secretary
should accept that this is the only fair and workable solution.
Douglas J Keil QPM
General
Secretary"
