Police Remuneration Review Body

The Police Remuneration Review Body (PRRB) will make recommendations to the Government on police pay, terms and conditions of service in the spring of this year. For most members their focus will be on what recommendation is made for the annual uplift in pay. This is generally applied from 1 September each year.

The Federation is building an evidence base and preparing its case for this year’s pay award, ensuring that you are rewarded for the work you do and that the ongoing impact of inflation and cost of living are taken into account.

What is clear from the data is the stark reality that real terms police pay has become seriously eroded over the last decade and a half. Although increases in 2023 and 2024 went some way to address long-term degradation, there has been a degradation of pay for frontline officers of 21% since 2009.

Although securing an uplift in pay is imperative there are also many other areas that are considered by the PRRB. This includes South East and London allowances, London Weighting, P-Factor, pay points within ranks, base pay of ranks, unsocial hours payments, on-call allowance, motor vehicle allowance, dog handlers allowance, away from home overnight allowance, hardship allowance and annual leave.

This means that the recommendations from the PRRB are vitally important to your overall remuneration package.

For those unaware of the P-Factor this is the additional amount added to your base pay to compensate you for the unique dangers within policing and the restrictions it places on you.

The PRRB is meant to act as an independent body. It is therefore our view that recommendations should be made with no political interference and with no reference to the money available within policing.

If recommendations are made that are simply not affordable then it is our view that it is for government to decide to not implement them.

Since the introduction of the PRRB in 2014 the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) has submitted detailed evidence on your behalf to the PRRB.

We have felt that the evidence and views of federated officers have been overlooked for many years. PRRB recommendations have been made taking into account government views and financial limitations.What is more concerning around the PRRB process is that there is no longer collective bargaining or binding arbitration in the process. Our concerns around the process are:

The remit letter from government to the PRRB sets out the areas to address for each year.
The PRRB is a panel of members selected by the government.

There is no opportunity to collectively bargain within the process, once submissions by stakeholders are made the PRRB decide their recommendations in isolation.

These recommendations are then sent back to government who can choose to either accept them, decline them or modify them.

An analogy of this is: ‘It’s like a football match where one side selects the opponent’s players, referees the game and has a veto over the result’.

Following a decision by the PFEW’s National Council this all ultimately led to PFEW withdrawing from the PRRB in 2021. Although we are no longer a formal part of the PRRB process we do still make our case very strongly on behalf of our membership.

It is our hope that the PRRB will this year take into consideration, and make suitable recommendations, in the areas that we have highlighted below. These areas have been identified from engagement with local forces and through the PFEW annual Pay and Morale Survey.

It is important to note here that a survey conducted in 2024 by PFEW showed that over 97.7 per cent of members wanted PFEW to pursue collective bargaining and binding arbitration.

The response to this poll was over 50,000 members. If recommendations from the PRRB are either not suitable for our membership, or we feel they are not independent politically or financially, then we will consider polling our members again.

This time it will seek the views of federated officers around the proposed PRRB recommendations on police pay and conditions.

Whilst we deal with pay awards and not pay offers, and have no form of industrial rights, we believe it is important that officers can voice their opinion on sub-standard recommendations.

If we are to demonstrate to the government the strength of feeling there is about police pay then it is important that the entire membership is involved in this.

Needless to say, we expect Chief Officers to make recommendations in their NPCC submission to the PRRB that seeks proper and fair remuneration for police officers.

Gavin Stephens, Chair of the NPCC, recently called for the ‘biggest shake-up’ of policing and argued that ‘we are facing a once-in-a-generation chance to change our police service’.

According to the PRRB pay is a critical component of any such ‘shake-up’ and it said that pay and reward were an important role in attracting recruits with the right motivations, and in creating strong ethical behaviour within forces.’

At a time when the public’s confidence and trust in the police service is reported to be unacceptably low, it is imperative to establish the ‘right pay and reward structures’ within and across ranks.

Areas for consideration

 

> Pay

1. Annual Pay Award – Members were disappointed that the recommended PRRB uplift in 2024 was below that recommended by other public sector pay bodies.

We want the long term pay degradation to be fully addressed by the PPRB. As stated above our figures show that this is still at 21%. If recruitment and retention issues are to be addressed, then pay needs addressing.

Needless to say, that it is only right that you are remunerated correctly for the difficult work you do each day.

2. P-Factor – We have independent academic evidence showing that the P-Factor is not correctly factored into police pay. This will provide additional evidence to improve police pay to its correct position.

3. Base pay and Constables Pay Points – We are also submitting evidence that the base pay of all ranks needs to be reviewed. This will be essential if the rectification of police pay is to be achieved.

Often there are issues not just with the base pay of each rank but also the difference between the top rate of one rank and the lowest rate of the next rank.

There is evidence that the Constables Pay Points, currently set at 7 levels, should be set at 5 levels. This would enable officers to progress to the top pay point in less time. For Inspecting ranks see point 15 below.

 

> Allowances

4. Shift Alteration Allowance – There is strong evidence showing that officers are having their shifts changed at short notice at an alarming rate.

This prevents officers from planning rest, recuperation and a family life. It also potentially costs officers additional money when a shift is change, for example to arrange for additional childcare.

Rosters should be published a month prior to commencing, and should cover, at least, 3 months. Any alteration of a published roster covering those 3 months should result in financial compensation for the officer. This would be a new type of allowance and one that has been highlighted as an increasing issue for officers.

5. South East and London Allowances – We have concerns that the South East and London Allowances are discretionary and decided by the Chief Officer or Commissioner.

We believe that the PRRB system currently in place should not provide Chief Officers or Commissioners with the discretion not to implement what is decided through the PRRB and Government. As such we are asking that the discretionary element is removed.

6. London Weighting – London Weighting was introduced to compensate for the additional costs of London. The weighting is currently uplifted in line with the annual pay award. We believe this approach in fundamentally flawed.

We ask that consideration be given that this amount is increased with CPI and that a retrospective review of the current figure is undertaken to give an accurate amount that London Weighting should be set at if it had been uplifted in line with inflation and the CPI.

7. Unsocial Hours Payment – We are asking that there is an increase to this payment for those in receipt of it for working Saturday and Sunday.

8. On Call Allowance – Under Winsor this was designed as a disincentive allowance. However, the amount is too low for this to be the case.

We ask that the amount is raised to £36.13 for a day when an officer is on-call (this will place Police Officers at parity with Police Staff).

We further ask that this be paid at two times that amount when on-call on a rest day and five times that amount when on-call on an annual leave day. We have concerns that there is also no national guidance around on-call and that data is not collected centrally.

To avoid further issues in the future the amount should be index-linked, and the on-call allowance should form part of pensionable pay.

9. Motor Vehicle Allowance – Current proposals put forward by the NPCC will not adequately compensate officers for using their own vehicles. To adequately compensate officers there would need to be an increase in both essential user allowance and mileage payments.

10. Away from home overnight allowance and hardship allowance – Our proposal is for this to match with Police Scotland.

11. Detective allowance (NEW) – Given the exam and ongoing accreditation required to become a detective we feel that there should be financial recognition of this. We have asked that a figure of £1250 per year be considered to address this.

 

> Entitlements

12. Annual Leave – We were happy that the PRRB valued some of our arguments around annual leave in 2024. However, we are still behind other public sector organisations around the time it takes to reach the upper limit of annua leave entitlements.

We are also still behind other public sector workers, especially Police Scotland, who receive more annual leave that officers in England and Wales.

We maintain our position that there needs to be a further increase and that a form of long service leave should be introduced.

 

> Regulatory Issues

13. Acting-Up Allowance, Temporary Salary & Temporary Promotion – There is significant confusion between these three areas within regulations. We are asking for a simplified approach.

If this change is accepted we hope that officer ‘acting-up’ will be paid from day one and that all time spent ‘acting-up’ is treated as reckonable service.

 

> Other Issues

14. Court warnings – There is growing evidence that some officers are being court warned for significant parts of the year. Although we would expect the Chief Officers to address this matter with the CPS and Judiciary, we don’t feel that this is happening. We are asking for consideration be given to a court warnings payment.

15. Inspecting rank regulations – We have serious concerns that the 1994 PNB agreement is now outdated for modern policing.

Our own survey has shown that the majority (93%) believe that the Inspecting ranks should be entitled to a shift pattern like Constables and Sergeants.

We also have concerns over the excessive hours Inspecting rank members are working. As a disincentive, overtime payments should be introduced to act as a balance between the 1994 PNB Agreement and as compensation for additional hours worked.

We also believe that the base pay of both ranks needs to increase given the demands and responsibility of these ranks in the current workplace.

There are concerns over the gap between the Inspector and Chief Inspector ranks and that there should be a clear gap between the two ranks. In addition, there should also be an increase in the gap between the ranks of Sergeant and Inspector.

After 30 years since the introduction of the 1994 PNB agreement it is disappointing that this agreement has not been adequately reviewed.

Given the length of time that any work in this area could take we are seeking an interim pensionable payment be made to the Inspecting ranks.

This would encourage both promotion into the ranks and assist with retention and experience within the ranks.

16. Unused Rest Days and Annual Leave – There are ongoing issues with unused rest days and officers unable to take annual leave. We are asking the PRRB to look into these matters including ways in which officers can be financially compensated.

17. Recuperation leave – This type of leave is not currently in Police Regulations. Whilst many forces take a benevolent approach there is nothing in the regulations to provide officers with recuperation leave following an injury on duty or exposure to a traumatic event.

The introduction of recuperation leave should allow an immediate line manager to grant recuperation leave rather than an officer reporting sick for a period of up to three days.

Members should be reassured that a considerable amount of work is being done by PFEW to build a strong and detailed evidence base and to make our case to government.

The work you do in the most difficult circumstances needs to be properly recognised and we will continue to fight on your behalf.

Thank you.