Remuneration of the Clerk and the Treasurer of the Metropolitan Police Authority

Report: 3
Date: 15 January 2002
By: the Head of Human Resources and Professional Standards

Summary

At its meeting on 6 September 2001, the Human Resources Committee (HRC) agreed that pay increases for the Clerk and Treasurer will be based upon the process used for other MPA staff, but will remain a matter for the Remuneration Sub Committee (RSC). This report proposes a process for considering the remuneration of the Clerk and the Treasurer.

A. Recommendations

1. That the process outlined at paragraphs 9-11 is adopted for the pay progression of the Clerk and the Treasurer of the Metropolitan Police Authority.

B. Supporting information

1. At its meeting on 6 September 2001, the HRC agreed that pay increases for the Clerk and Treasurer will be based upon the process used for other MPA staff, but will remain a matter for the RSC.

2. The pay progression process for MPA staff is intended to reflect the findings of the Hay and Cornwell Affiliates reports, namely :

• High quality staff would be critical if the Authority was to establish itself and play the role foreseen for it in legislation. This would be in the interests of all stakeholders, particularly members and the MPS.
• Relatively few well paid high quality staff would be a preferable option than a larger number of less effective people.
• The MPA is unlikely to be able to provide careers, particularly for more senior staff, although some reference to public sector pay practice would be appropriate.

3. In order to ensure that the overall increase in the pay bill is controlled, the HRC agreed that the Finance Planning and Best Value (FPBV) Committee should be informed of the budgetary effect and that any pay increases be paid from existing budgetary provision.

4. The report to the HRC recommended that all staff receive a 'cost of living' pay increase based on the Retail Price Index (RPI) (all items) in April of each year. This would not be part of the formal pay progression framework since anyone receiving just the RPI increase would effectively 'stand still' in pay terms. It was agreed that the Clerk and Treasurer should have discretion over the payment of a cost of living increase. The annual cost of living increase for the first full year of the Authority is 1.8%.

5. The report further recommended that the pay progression framework be based entirely upon a Performance Related Pay (PRP) system. Each individual would be set SMART objectives for the next twelve months requiring delivery of improved performance against MPA or local objectives / standards. The framework would focus on the gathering and recording of evidence and the alignment of individual objectives with organisational or local goals. The emphasis would be on service delivery and business objectives.

6. Under this framework, staff would receive a PRP increase based upon a percentage of the individual's salary. For the first full year of the Authority, the HRC agreed that the maximum PRP increase should be 7%, but should be subject to review in future years. This maximum percentage would not be regarded as the norm but would only be awarded to those staff who demonstrated that they are highly effective in achieving objectives and consistently demonstrating the full range of competences. Fifty per cent of the increase would be consolidated into pay and pensionable whilst the other fifty per cent would be non-consolidated. This would ensure that staff strived to maintain a high performance every year in order to attract the highest year-on-year salary.

7. The percentage of the PRP increase awarded would be depend upon an assessment by the reporting officer and countersigning officer of the level of performance and the extent to which individuals met their objectives. A PRP increase would only be paid if the reporting officer and countersigning officer were satisfied that it was appropriate.

8. The annual cost of living increase and PRP increase (if appropriate) would be payable from 1 July each year. The payments would be made in 12 equal instalments rather than a lump sum to encourage staff retention.

9. It is suggested that the report for the Clerk is written, and objectives agreed, by the Chair of the HRC and the Chair of the Authority.

10. It is suggested that the report for the Treasurer is written, and the objectives agreed, by the Chair of the FPBV Committee and the Chair of the Authority.

11. It is further suggested that for the first full year of the Authority, the Chair of HRC and FPBV, in consultation with the Chair of the Authority, should agree a cost of living increase, and make an objective assessment of the proportion of any PRP increase, that should be recommended to the Remuneration Sub Committee. For the first full year the limits will be 1.8% for the cost of living increase and 7% for the performance element respectively.

C. Financial implications

The financial implications will be dependent upon the decisions of the RSC in relation to paragraphs 9-11.

D. Background papers

• Pay arrangements for MPA staff (report to the HRC on 6 September 2001)

E. Contact details

Report author: Alan Johnson, Human Resources, MPA.

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback