Forced retirement of police officers

Hundreds of experienced officers could be lost as police chiefs "abuse" the system by taking advantage of a loophole which enables them to force officers to retire, the Police Federation said today. Three police authorities - Surrey, Strathclyde and North Wales - have already backed the cost-cutting move and more are expected to follow, the union which represents rank-and-file officers in England and Wales said.

Even though police officers cannot be made redundant, under regulation A19, which is contained in the Police Pensions Regulations 1987, officers who have served 30 years or more can be "required to retire" if their retention would "not be in the general interests of efficiency". It applies to all police below chief officer rank, regardless of ability or age.

But Simon Reed, the federation's vice-chairman, said the regulation was designed to enable forces to remove the odd officer who, having been in the job for 30 years or more, was perhaps cruising and not performing efficiently.

"It's never been designed to force hundreds, maybe thousands of officers, to go," he said. "It's a very blunt instrument for that. Chief officers have abused the system to get it to do what they want. All forces will be considering this and there will be more that will implement it. All that chief officers are doing is getting the backing of the police authorities to do it. At the end of the day it's the chief officers who are making the decisions on this."

So far, North Wales, Strathclyde and Surrey police authorities have all backed the plan in principle.

"We think it's not the way to do it at all," Mr Reed continued. "We're going to lose huge amounts of experienced officers across all the roles they perform. While chief officers will be immune, everyone else from officers on the street to those in specialist teams such as child protection or experienced detectives could all be affected.

"We're going to lose all this experience. They're doing it purely to try to save money."

Up to 300 officers could be eligible for forced retirement in the West Midlands, the country's second largest force, alone, he said. The police service needs to cut its wage bill after the Government said funding will fall by 20% over the next four years. The spending cuts, coupled with the forced retirements, mean "the future is challenging and very depressing for the police", Mr Reed said.

The North Wales branch of the Police Federation said 53 officers had been told they could go by April and "probably up to 250 officers over the next four years", according to BBC News. Shadow home secretary Ed Balls said the Government was putting chief constables and police authorities "in an impossible position". He added, "This blunt instrument was never intended for this purpose and, where implemented, will mean all officers above the 30 year threshold being forced to retire. It will mean losing some of our most experienced people from the police service. The public are rightly concerned that losing thousands of police officers will undermine the fight against crime and anti-social behaviour."

A Strathclyde Police Authority spokeswoman said its members "widely acknowledged that regulation A19 is something we hoped would never have to be implemented. However, the financial situation is such that it does have to be enforced," she said.

"The authority approved the use of A19 as a legitimate way of tackling the budgetary issues. A paper will now be prepared for the authority's pension sub-committee, at a date to be confirmed, which will seek to apply the policy to those who meet the criteria, i.e. those Strathclyde-funded officers who have accrued 30 years pensionable service."

She added: "The force will be contacting everyone who will be affected by the enforcement of A19 so that we can explain in more detail how it will work." The decision was taken at a police authority meeting on October 21, she said.

A Home Office spokeswoman said the issue of whether to implement regulation A19 or not was a matter for individual forces.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) said chief constables "have difficult choices ahead".

Chief Constable Peter Fahy, the Acpo lead on workforce development, said: "The reality is that significant cash savings must be made by April 1 next year, while the police service must do all it can to protect the front line as far as possible. As part of this, some forces are looking at their options around workplace efficiency. Decisions are a matter for individual chief officers and their local police authorities to consider in the best interests of the communities they serve."

A series of charities also criticised the plans.

Michelle Mitchell, director of Age UK, said the move "flies right in the face of equality legislation and runs contrary to the Government's plan to abolish forced retirement".

"The huge pressure to slash budgets is no justification for bypassing basic equality principles which should withstand even the toughest economic and political environment," she said.

And Chris Ball, chief executive of The Age and Employment Network, described the plans as "naked ageism".

"Offering incentives for people to retire is one thing, forcing them to do so is another," he said. "We hope there will be legal challenge to this attempt to use officers' age and length of service against them."

Surrey Inspector first in line

As reported by This is Surrey: 'Face of police' forced to retire in budget cuts

Surrey Police is forcing the highest-ranking neighbourhood officer in Tandridge into retirement. In a letter leaked to the Surrey Mirror, officers of inspector rank and above with over 30 years' service were told in the "tough financial climate" they would be "required to retire on the grounds of efficiency of the force".

Inspector Elaine Burtenshaw, 50, the face of community policing in the district, admitted she was shocked when she found out. And she said she was touched by the expressions of concern and good wishes she had received since news of her departure broke.

She said: "If anyone wants to employ a retired police inspector, ask them to get in touch. I love my job. I still want to go out there and catch the bad guys, but I am going to retire on a high and enjoy the next six months before I go. I still remember when I joined the police. It was June 26, 1979 – my mum kept a cutting from the paper.

"But I'm not sure what the future holds."

Leicestershire announces retirement axes 30-plus

This is Leicestershire reports: Police veterans facing axe

Many experienced and skilled police officers face being forced to retire. Leicestershire Constabulary is reviewing a scheme which allowed staff on the verge of retirement after 30 years' service to keep their jobs. The 30-plus scheme – which was offered by many forces – meant experienced officers with special skills could be retained.

The officers allowed to stay kept their pay and rank as well as being able to claim a lump sum from their pension pot. Some officers said they were concerned that the force, which is facing a £15 million annual budget cut, is shedding some of its best officers purely to save money. The force has written to the 29 officers on the 30-plus scheme to say their positions would be reviewed.

The Leicester Mercury understands that five have so far been told they will lose their jobs and one will be allowed to stay. One officer, who asked not to be named, said five officers were appealing after being told to leave, although it was unlikely they would succeed.

"The ones who have been told to leave are shocked," he said. "They thought they would at least be able to stay until March – the end of the financial year. The force needs to save money and it's clear nobody is indispensable, but the worry is we are losing good people.

"These are officers whose skills are in demand – that's why they were on this scheme."

The 30-plus scheme was introduced when forces were struggling to recruit. Officers accepted received a lump sum from their pension pots but no longer had contributions paid to their pensions.

Chief Constable Simon Cole said: "It is the case that a number of colleagues, as a result of these reviews, have been told we won't be retaining them. I realise some of these officers have worked for the force for many years with great distinction."

He said it was a "very difficult decision" to let them go.

Human resources director Alison Naylor said the reviews were based on whether the role "continues to add value to the organisation". She said: "It is too early to say at this stage how many officers will be retained."

The Mercury reported in July that up to 400 police staff in Leicestershire could lose their jobs under spending cuts. At the time, 150 of the force's 1,400 civilian staff were already facing possible redundancy. The force aims to cut its 2011-12 budget of £180 million by £15million.