Extra Payments Proposed to encourage Officers not to Retire

 

The Standing Joint Committee presented a long report with reference to the Police Superannuation Act, 1906.

The Committee stated: –

The Police Authority appear to be chiefly concerned with the provision of Section 1 of the Act, authorising them to direct that police officers who have earned their pensions shall be entitled to retire at any time on the pensions to which they were entitled on the completion of their pensionable term, and authorising them to grant extra pay to Constables who have completed their pensionable service, but whose service it may be deemed desirable to retain. In the county there are 72 pensioners, and the annual cost of pensions from 1st April 1905 to 31st March 1906 was £3, 597 4s. 1d. During the current year pensions amounting in all to £933. 18s. 6d. may be claimed by the undermentioned officers: –

The officers regard this condition of affairs from two points of view. First, they consider that as two-thirds of their salary has been earned in the shape of pension, each officer is really serving the county for one-third the pay of a Constable below the rank of Sergeant. Secondly, the view of some of the officers is that if they retire while still practically in the prime of life, their character and expertise ensure their obtaining other employment at a rate of pay exceeding the one-third of their salary as officers on the active list. And furthermore, that this employment will in no case be so arduous, so responsible, and so likely to be detrimental to health as police officers.

The Committee have decided: That the following police officers shall be granted the additional pay set against their respective names in Column 4 of the following statement in consideration of their continuing to serve in the Force, such additional pay not to carry any extra pension: –

Mr E. B. Barnard: I want the Council to contemplate the business effect of this proposal. I follow closely the arguments put forward by the officers, and it is very natural that they should hold to that view. The Joint Committee, I remind the council, are different to those in neighbouring counties, inasmuch as their proceedings are conducted in private, but in the adjacent counties the County Council have an opportunity of reading the discussions of the Joint Committee, and that makes it easier for them to understand any recommendations they make. Here, our Committee offer no sort of argument, but simply give us the declaration of the officers, who are obviously interested parties, and then tell us that they have decided to grant the extra pay amounting to £190 a year. I know it may be said that these people will leave if you don’t do that. It would be folly for me to hazard a speculation, prophets being reckless people, but I would venture to think it is quite sufficient for us to wait until they do so. I have ventured to make out a comparison of salaries paid in adjacent counties with what we are paying. I will not deal with the subordinate officers, but take the Chief of Police. The Isle of Ely, Buckinghamshire and Bedfordshire pay their Chief Constable £350, Cambridgeshire £450 and Berkshire £320. it may be urged that we are a Metropolitan county, and so I will give the figures of two Metropolitan counties, Surrey and Kent, which I think will be admitted are fair examples, and I find that they are paying their Chief Constable £500 each. Well, if that is the position of affairs, I am bound to say that if we are to be told that we must increase the salaries of these officers, or otherwise we run the dreadful risk of them retiring, I should be prepared to take that risk, enormous as it is. (Laughter). I will go further, and venture to suggest that as no other county, so far as I have been able to hear, has adopted similar action to the one suggested here, the Standing Committee be asked to take back this recommendation and consider it more fully and find out what other people in the country are doing. If they would do that, I think it would be more acceptable to a large number of members of this Council (Hear, hear). I have tried to speak without trespassing on the prerogative which the Committee undoubtebly possess. It was not my intention to deal with the matter of salaries, but simply touch upon the main principle which is involved in one body spending the money provided by another.

The Chairman : I quite see now, because of course it is always easy to be wise after the event, that being a new thing, the Committee ought perhaps in their report to have entered into more detail as to their reasons for the decision arrived at. Strictly speaking, there is no power to refer this matter back, but I quite see it is a matter of justice and courtesy both to the Council and to all concerned that this being an entirely new departure it should be very carefully considered. As Chairman of the Standing Joint Committee, I am quite ready to take it back and submit it to the further consideration of the Committee. (Applause). I think this matter should be very care fully considered.

The Earl Of Verulam : The real reason we passed this was because it was a matter of saving money. As a matter of fact, if the Chief Constable were to retire and receive a pension of £400, and in his stead we appointed a Chief Constable at £500, we should be paying away £900 instead of the present £600 so that by this proposal there would be a saving of several hundred pounds a year to the county. And the same would apply to the other officers.

Mr Lewis Evans : I hope the Committee will consider these cases separately, and not group them together like they are here, because in some cases we might consider them favourably and not others.

The Chairman : I cannot promise to do that, but the whole matter shall go back to the Committee and have full consideration. (Hear, hear)

The payment of a pension of £66 13s. to ex-Inspector John Hyatt on retirement was approved.