Review of long term sickness cases

Report: 10
Date: 02 May 2002
By: Commissioner

Summary

In response to a request from the Chair of the Human Resources Committee this report provides information relating to officers subject to Regulation 46 Police Regulations 1995 (reduction of pay), and data relating to restricted and recuperative duties.

A. Recommendations

Members are asked to note the contents of the report and the action being taken to address the consequent issues.

B. Supporting information

Background

1. Regulation 46 of the Police Regulations 1995 – pay during sick leave – (originally Regulation 9 of the Police (Amendment) (No 2) Regulations 1994) was introduced as a result of a recommendation in the Sheehy Report. It was implemented within the MPS in June 1995. (Essentially, this resulted in the prospect that officers could be placed on half pay following 183 days sickness and off pay after one year). A Statutory Instrument was subsequently enacted to allow the MPS Commissioner to delegate the decision-making power to Assistant Commissioners (ACs). This was introduced into the MPS in April 1998

2. When the Regulation was first introduced, the discretion to extend pay was exercised generously and a 'fail-safe' mechanism was introduced which stopped any automatic reduction in pay until the case had been decided by the Commissioner, even if that was after the 183 day limit. In practice, the presumption required by the Regulation that pay would be reduced unless discretion was exercised in advance of 183 days was overturned.

3. The National Audit Office report on sickness absence in the MPS, and the HMIC report on the management of sickness absence in police services made comment about the application of Regulation 46, with the NAO report criticising the MPS' relatively generous exercise of discretion. The MPS approach was also criticised when Sir Paul Condon appeared in front of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in February 1998. As a result, the policy was changed, introducing the presumption that pay would be reduced or stopped unless there were reasons in a particular case to exercise discretion in the officer's favour.

4. There were at that time two specific areas in which it was expected that discretion would be exercised favourably:

• where the officer's incapacity is an injury or illness sustained or contracted in the course of and by reason of the performance of the duties of the office of constable;
• where the officer is in the terminal stages of an illness.

5 This policy was further reviewed and revised in November 2001. This altered the two specific areas for favourable discretion to where:

• the officer's incapacity is an injury or illness sustained or contracted in the course of the performance of the duties of the office of constable;
• the officer is suffering from an illness, which may prove to be terminal.

6. Guidance has been issued in relation to the exercise of discretion, and pregnancy-related; maternity or miscarriage related sickness.

7. HR Policy chairs monthly meetings of the main practitioners of the Regulation 46 administrative process, who are based in each AC's business group. At these meetings, specific issues are raised and discussed around the day-to-day management of Regulation 46 cases, as well as reviewing the way in which the Regulation is applied across the MPS.

Current position

8. Over the past 14 months the number of officers subject to Regulation 46 has fluctuated between 226 and 283. Data is recorded for officers in the categories of full, half and off pay and the most recent data is shown graphically at Appendix 1 (see Supporting material).

9. Regulation 46 data showing business group and pay status is set out at Appendix 2. This shows the number of officers who have been on continuous sick absence for more than 183 days and whether they are on full pay, half pay or off pay. Data relating to the reasons for decisions about pay status is recorded on the officer's OG 46 file, given the numbers of officers involved it has not been possible to obtain that information as the information is not collated centrally. Data for members of civil staff on reduced pay is not readily available.

10. February figures show that the trend for all three categories is down, with minor variations, particularly for half pay extensions. Given that Regulation 46 decisions are not made by one Assistant Commissioner, work has recently been undertaken to examine the consistency and quality of decision making. The analysis of this data is currently being considered. Issues surrounding Regulation 46 are also to form part of an impending inspection by the MPS inspectorate.

11. Further work has also been undertaken on behalf of the Assistant Commissioner HR on a sample of 'off pay' cases to attempt to identify common features contributing to the protracted nature of the cases. 28 cases were reviewed with the following result:

• 71% - or 20 were psychiatric cases. Of these, 53% involve Grievances, Employment Tribunal or Legal actions or Discipline/Criminal investigations.
• 17% - or 5 were orthopaedic, or mixed orthopaedic and psychiatric cases. Of these, three were seeking medical retirement, two of which had been refused and were the subject of appeal to a Home Office referee.
• 10% - or 3 were cases involving, respiratory factors, debility and fatigue.

In addition, a small number of cases were subject to a detailed review and resulted in a number of recommendations for improvement. These are contained at Appendix 3 and are in the process of being actioned.

Restricted and recuperative duties

12. As part of the overall strategy to reduce sickness and ultimately ill health retirement, extensive use has been made of both recuperative and restricted duties. Management information is not readily available, data having to be collected by requesting information from personnel managers. Alternative arrangements are currently being explored to have the data captured through the CARM system.

13. A review carried out in February 2002 revealed that there were 1,229 police officers employed on recuperative and restricted duties, of these 896 had been so employed for less than 12 months, 226 had been employed for over 12 months and 107 had been placed on restricted duties.

14. The Service's approach to recuperative duties has recently been reviewed and refined. Occupational Health team managers have now established a programme of visits to identify OCUs, with a view to assisting the management team tackle sickness and recuperative duty issues, by offering advice and a range of options. These interventions will be assessed for effectiveness against changes in sickness rates, reductions in the number of staff on recuperative duty and progress made against specific cases that have been subject to case conferences, or review by the Senior Occupational Health Physician. The revised recuperative duty policy is contained at Appendix 4.

C. Financial implications

Sickness absence

1. The financial implications of sickness absence are set out below. Costs based upon a 10-year constable in receipt of housing allowance are set out as follows.

Pay plus allowances

£33,006

First six months (full pay)

£16,503

Second six months (half pay)

£9,786

Each six months thereafter (off pay)

£3,069

Ill health retirement

2. The cost of an ill-health retirement in the first year normally includes commutation and then payment of pension at a reduced rate. Costing for a 10-year officer taking maximum commutation is set out below (the pension will be index linked).

Year 1

£40,221

Thereafter annually

£6,703

3. Should an additional injury pension be granted, the cost is made up of a one off gratuity payment and a tax-free pension, from which DSS payments are deducted. It is paid in addition to the ill-health pension. Most awards are made in the 2nd band, the costing for which is set out below.

Year 1 (gratuity + injury pension)

£13,805

Thereafter annually

£7,316

Total cost - of Ill health and injury pension:

Year 1 cost (total Ill health + injury awards)

£54,026

Thereafter annually (Ill health + injury pension)

£14,019

D. Background papers

None.

E. Contact details

Report author: Michael Shurety, MPS

For information contact:

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

Appendix 2: Regulation 46 data summary (excluding 5 officers since retired)

Appendix 3: Review of long term sickness cases

Eleven cases were examined in detail and a number of key areas for improvement identified including –

• Strategies for ensuring prompt initial referral and the maintenance of contact with officers who decline contact, the need to ensure that officers attend appointments with OH practitioners.
• Tighter control of the length of time before referrals are made to medical officers and psychiatrists, the need to reduce delays in obtaining medical notes and reports.
• Measures are required to improve the information flow between managers and OH professionals.
• Managers and OH practitioners need clarification of their options, including those under Regulation 35 b of the Police Regulations to bring about an officers return to work, and of the use of discipline in sickness cases.
• It is clear from the correspondence that many of the officers in the sample who have become involved in discipline proceedings, employment tribunals or grievance procedures are unlikely to return to work until the source of their 'complaint' has been dealt with. Even then, a return to work is not a foregone conclusion. Medical research shows that it is extremely difficult to bring back members of staff who have been sick for over 6 months and the length of time it takes to resolve such issues mitigates against their return to work. The issue is to be reviewed.

Appendix 4: Recuperative duties

This notice should be read in conjunction with Special Notice 15/01 Attendance Management Policy and Procedures

As part of the Metropolitan Police Service ongoing commitment to support individuals in their rehabilitation following illness or injury, Occupational Health, in conjunction with local management have revised the current process to develop a more holistic approach.

Where individuals are unable to return immediately to full duties recuperative duties should be considered.

The use of recuperative duties is a short term, temporary programme of work to enable those recovering from long term illness or injury to progress towards full duties. It should only be considered when significant progress towards recovery could be expected.

In order to better facilitate a return to full duties, some alterations have been made to the current system of managing recuperative duties. These are:

• All individuals will be given a Recuperative Duty Progress Plan by the OHA or Medical Officer
• Individuals on recuperative duties will routinely increase their work commitment by a minimum of one hour a week (or four hours a month), unless medical evidence indicates otherwise
• Where possible, individuals will be placed on recuperative duties within their normal work pattern
• Recuperative duty programmes will be documented on a new proforma (copy attached). This will enable managers to monitor and document an individual's progress. Completed forms will become a vital part of the medical review within Occupational Health
• If an individual has difficulty in maintaining the expected progress, or is making progress quicker than anticipated the Personnel Manager will have the ability to decrease or increase the hours worked, within the parameters set by the Medical Officer or OHA. Any changes made will be drawn to the attention of the OHA at the next recuperative duties clinic, regardless of whether the individual is under OHA or Medical Officer care.

The progressive recuperative duty plans will continue as long as an individual is on recuperative duties.

This new process will be implemented immediately. Those already in the recuperative duties system will be re-assessed at their next review and a further 3-month plan will be formulated if recuperative duties need to be continued.

Please contact your Personnel Manager for further information.

Draft Police Notice 6th March 2002

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback