My feed

to access all these features


So what is the MN opinion on the police pay?

59 replies

FlossALump · 13/12/2007 09:43

I'd be interested to know what others think, really. I/m not sure my viewpoint is what it is supposed to be!!

OP posts:
bobbinogsnib · 13/12/2007 09:51

I don't know about MN, but mine is that they can't strike - end of !

As to the pay situation, i can't honestly say, but my dh doesn't get the option of taking action when his 'pay deal' turned out to be worth virtually nothing when the cost of living was added in

Unfortunately there are certain professions that just cannot strike - and the government should make sure that the pay is inline with being able to live and raise a family

deenymcqueenygoreandguts · 13/12/2007 09:54

This has happened to nurses for years and years, they stage our small pay rise every time.

They cannot strike.
Hopefully tho this will trail blaze for other professions in a similar position who are in the same position about taking strike action.
Hopefully the action of the police will make the Government sit up and take notice.

These professions are sick of bieng shoved under the carpet and gagged.

CarmenerryChristmas · 13/12/2007 09:56

This happened about ten years ago in Ireland, same reason iirc. They all rang in sick on the same day, blue flu, it was referred to in the media. Most people supported them, they do a horrible job and should be renumerated properly imo. They shouldn't have to strike.

FlossALump · 13/12/2007 10:09

Dp is a pc and I am a nurse. I feel like deeny. I kind of feel like they are throwing all their toys out of the pram over getting what everyone else has been getting when they have been privileged to get more than others for years.

DP states that his job has lots of conditions attatched and therefore they are entitled to a bigger pay rise than other services, but they also get paid more and have better pensions -so I'm not sure it stacks up.

Basically for the first time in years they have got the same pay rise as me! It wasn't enough for us but then why should it be more for them?

OP posts:
Kathyate6mincepies · 13/12/2007 10:12

I don't think the govt can get away with giving too much money to the police because public confidence in them is so low. Of course, that's not actually their fault, it's the fault of targets, health & safety culture etc, but politically I think these things need to be sorted out before they can see much more money.

GloriaInEleusis · 13/12/2007 10:19

No way no how should they be allowed to strike. But I do agree they do a tough job abd should be paid accordingly for the unusual risk involved in their jobs.

However, it should also be in line with what other people get paid. Not everyones pay goes up when the cost of living does. I don't really know how much money they make, base pay, bonuses, benefits, etc. so I'm not really qualified to judge on this aspect.

But I do feel very strongly that some professions are vital to the running of the city and therefore should not be allowed to strike(fireman and tube drivers included!)

DanaScully · 13/12/2007 10:22

Well the fire service went on strike didn't they! Reasons and moral issues aside, I thought that was quite shocking!

mylittleponey · 13/12/2007 10:26

but they are people as well - don't know about the pay etc but there must be something wrong if they want to strike?

SquonkaClaus · 13/12/2007 10:28

the way I understand it (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that they always get their pay rises in September, but as it is not decided on until later in the year, it gets back-dated to the beginning of September.

This time, they have the rise that they expected, but it is not being backdated, so they will lose out on at least three months worth of pay rise.

Which is not what was understood, promised or expected.

Tis unfair.

Tis wrong.

But them striking would be MORE unfair and wrong imo.

GloriaInEleusis · 13/12/2007 10:38

If that's the whole storey, I think it's a bit dirty. But only a bit, and it's certainly not enough to warrant strike action.

MrsGrinch · 13/12/2007 10:40

I think that as they're not allowed to strike that they should have a decent mechanism for pay awards, where both parties are bound by the decision. From what I understand the force are bound by pay arbitration but the Government are not. It stinks and I think they've been shafted TBH.

They've settled on a figure only to be told it won't be backdated to September and therefore they don't get the full increase - Scottish police have had theirs backdated.

gomez · 13/12/2007 10:43

I think everyone has a right to withdraw their labour if they have been right royally shafted. Not sure however that this counts as being right royally shafted but more a welcome to the real world guys.

Why was the paydeal not agreed in time for September - were the Federation dragging their heels or the Home Office?

Only my tuppence-worth as a distraction from studying to which I really need to return....

GloriaInEleusis · 13/12/2007 10:46

I've had worse tricks played on me at my company and nobody here went on strike. That doesn't make it right. But, striking, at putting the city/country at risk is not something that I think is ever acceptable. The police are a vital service and we can not live without them for a day or even an hour.

Fair enough that they should have some mechanism agreed by the force and the government, but they will probably have to take factors like economy and affordability into account. You, like when the credit crunch hit the amount of tax paid to the government, the government will have to cut already over inflated spending.

So I think we need to know why the pay was not backdated. Perhaps that move meant x number of pc's didn't have to be laid off. And, if that's the case, it was perhaps the lesser of two evils. I have no idea what happened or why. I'm just saying their may be reason for the decision of which we are not aware.

But I stand firmly in the "vital services should not strike ground".

MrsGrinch · 13/12/2007 10:55

I expect the reasons will be given as economic.

The authority locally say they have the money to pay the rise in full but can't because their hands are tied by the government.

manchita · 13/12/2007 11:04

I don't think that they will actually strike, but I do believe the government have treated them unfairly.
After all, they do a very dangerous and important job.

witchandchips · 13/12/2007 11:17

I think one issue is the role of the govt. in this. Many public sector workers (nurses, teachers, the army and the police) have their pay set by "experts". These look at the case for increase from unions or workers reps, the case for a reduction from employers or the govt. and try and come up with an award which everyone is happy with. What is the point of them doing them if they are undermined by the govt who refuse to backdate pay (police) or refuse to honour the award (nurses)

skidoodle · 13/12/2007 18:10

I agree with gomez, everyone should have the right to withdraw their labour.

if the job they do is so important that it cannot be done without, then the employer will just have to settle sooner.

That's why people strike - to make the point of how important their labour is.

Some people here clearly think that striking is some form luxury that should only be done by people with pointless jobs. it makes no sense

particularly as the people who do the most important jobs often get paid the least money.

If you think people shouldn't strike if what they do matters they you essentially don't think people should be allowed to strike at all.

It all smacks of "as long as I'm not inconvenienced these people can have their little strike"

GloriaInEleusis · 13/12/2007 18:17

We aren't talking about inconvenience. If all the Cole and Able drivers go on strike and I can't have my organic veg box, that's an inconvenience. If pensioner is robbed and stabbed in the evening because there were no police on the street to protect her, that's a tad more serious.

I think some jobs are too important for people to throw their rattle out of their prams and refuse to work. Police are among them. That does not mean they shouldn't have some kind of mechanism for settling disputes -- they should. But, flat out refusing to do their job, in my opinion, should be grounds for dismissal.

I don't think the government is right to move the goal post on them like they have done. But refusing to show up to do your job is worse.

edam · 13/12/2007 18:24

I am entertained by the police force discovering the benefits of collective action and labour rights. Wonder if the govt. will call out the ex-miners to supervise the police picket lines?

Honestly, it is unfair not to backdate the award, but other professions have been in this situation for years.

Let's hope it makes the coppers realise they should be a little less hostile to public exercising their legitimate right to democratice protest. By not, for example, using anti-terrorist legislation to suppress ordinary people using their voice.

Unfitmother · 13/12/2007 18:26

They got the same as the nurses, I think it's fair.

saltirehangingonachristmastree · 13/12/2007 18:32

In the miltary - that's the RAF and Navy, not just the Army - they get told "oh we'll give you a pay rise of 2%, but tell you what, we'll give 0.5 % now and the rest when we feel like it". they get royally shafted all the time, and can't strike. however, the military are not a neccesary service, which
the police are.

GloriaInEleusis · 13/12/2007 18:34

ermmm... I think the military is very necessary. And, speakin gof the military, they deffo deserve a pay raise.


Don’t want to miss threads like this?


Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

saltirehangingonachristmastree · 13/12/2007 18:39

Well when i said they weren't neccessary I menat that they weren't providing a day to day service for the general public, in the way that Police, Firefighters, Paramedics do.
They (the military)do deserve a pay rise - a bloody big one. DH got a pay rise when he got promoted, which, by the time yout ake off his mess bill (which he has to pay even though he doesn't use it), MQ rent, garage rent (which we can't use), council tax, and the petrol he needs to get him to work it works out at under a £1.00 a month extra

Freckle · 13/12/2007 18:56

I do think the police face perils which other professions don't and therefore should get some sort of danger money. I also feel that if there was an agreement, then the government should stick to it and not try to move the goalposts because it suits them.

I do wonder how the officers assigned to protect members of the government feel about their job??

christmosschops30 · 13/12/2007 19:00

Lol nurses should get more 'danger money' than the police!!

It makes me so mad, nurses/paramedics get a shit pay deal of 2% staged pay and removal of special bank shift rates.
My dh who works in construction will get his 3rd payrise this year at Xmas plus a bonus of about £800 ....this is the norm for them.

It makes me sooo yes he has a very hard job but he's not saving lives or responsible for giving drugs or things like that. Ditto for ministers and people who sit in offices twatting about including those at the NHS

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.