Clear need for review of PNB agreement, says chair

21 February 2025

The chair of North Yorkshire Police Federation says the findings of a national survey of the inspecting ranks demonstrate the need for a review of the 1994 PNB Agreement.

Rob Bowles, himself a chief inspector, said the roles of inspector and chief inspector were ‘chalk and cheese’ compared to 31 years ago when the agreement was introduced.

He said it was ‘crazy’ that the agreement had not been revisited, saying that the results of a survey by the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) of inspectors and chief inspectors underlined the desire for it be reviewed.

Rob said: “So much has changed in the three decades since this was agreed and what was expected of the police service and of the inspecting ranks then compared to now is chalk and cheese. It's crazy it hasn't been reviewed up to now.

'There is a clear need for a review of the 1994 PNB Agreement'.

“We have much more responsibility, often covering senior ranks, and with that comes more hours and added pressure.

“We’re accountable for performance, for standards, for keeping the public safe in an ever-changing world, and we’re not compensated enough for that.

“Indeed, the results of the PFEW survey show that inspectors and chief inspectors across the country are working countless hours, effectively for free.

“Many colleagues will never get back the hours they are owed and should be compensated for them."

Since the agreement in 1994, the inspecting ranks have worked under different regulations from constables and sergeants.

Compensated

The inspecting ranks had their basic pay increased by around £3,000 a year but, in return, were no longer paid casual overtime.

They lost the right to compensation for cancelled rest days and for working on a bank holiday, other than the day being re-rostered.

There is also no right to a shift pattern, unlike constables and sergeants.

Rob said: “The pay difference between sergeant and inspector can act as a disincentive for promotion because of the loss of overtime and the extra demands.

“The same is often true of the difference between a top-rated inspector and chief inspector, and that can’t be right.”

The PFEW survey found that:

· 60 per cent of respondents are dissatisfied with their basic pay, with dissatisfaction higher among Chief Inspectors (70 per cent) than Inspectors (57 per cent)

· 81 per cent of expressed dissatisfaction with their allowances, with dissatisfaction highest in roles like road policing (87 per cent) and investigations (85 per cent)

· 78 per cent of are dissatisfied with their overall remuneration, with dissatisfaction higher among Chief Inspectors (84 per cent) than Inspectors (77 per cent)

· 85 per cent of respondents disagreed with the lack of additional payment for working on public holidays

· 65 per cent disagreed with not receiving extra pay when required to work in another force area (i.e. mutual aid)

· 80 per cent prefer a choice between financial compensation or a rest day in lieu for having to work on a rest day

· During a four week period, 67 per cent of respondents reported working an extra 0-20 hours above 40 hours per week (or above their agreed part-time hours), while 23 per cent work an extra 21-40 hours

· During a four week period, 74 per cent of respondents perform 0-4 days of duties above their rank

· 93 per cent of respondents feel that members in Inspecting ranks working full time should be entitled to a rostered shift pattern within Police Regulations

Desire

Rob said: “I sense there is a very real desire among the inspecting ranks for the agreement to be revisited, reviewed, and revised because 31 years on, I don’t think it’s fit for purpose.”

John Partington, PFEW acting national secretary, has also spoken of his desire for a review of the PNB Agreement.

He said: “The findings have been included in our pay positioning document that has been made available to the PRRB.

“This has led to us asking for changes to the regulations that cover the Inspecting ranks.

“I have also raised the PNB 1994 agreement at the Police Advisory Board with the view that no organisation would allow a 31-year-old agreement to still be in place without a review.

“There doesn’t seem to be any other stakeholder with the view that this does not need to be reviewed.

PRRB

“However, we will need to see what recommendations are made from the PRRB over the next few months.”

John said that a key area for him was that 30 per cent of respondents reported being paid for working over their agreed part time hours, and only 54 per cent reported that these hours count towards their pension.

He said: “Of concern is that there seems to be a number of part-time officers in the inspecting ranks who are not claiming the additional hours that they work over their agreed hours.

“It is important that these hours are paid and that they are counted for pensions purposes.

“This is not optional, and forces should be paying the hours and counting them towards an officer’s pension automatically.”