Dear Editor
It is important to observe that an independent review recently concluded of police pay and conditions in England and Wales, observed (in March 2011) that their salary structure was “designed for a police service and society neither of which any longer exists.”
The review made a clear distinction between those positions “largely confined to police stations and not requiring special skills” and those with special skills, including detectives; personnel required to use firearms, maintain public order; as well as neighbourhood policing teams; in addition to having to work “unsocial hours.”
The report projected the likelihood of further reforms, including the reduction of pay for under-performing police chiefs and lower ranks; a clear indication of the practice of performance evaluation inherent in the existing salary administration system – to the extent that bonuses are paid as considered earned.
Not inappropriately the report revealed the intention to explore the conduct of regular fitness tests for officers, noting that there has been a “dramatic” increase in the number of police who are restricted to less physically demanding duties. In this connection there was no indication as to whether the report had undertaken an age analysis to ascertain any correlation between physical fitness and the age factor.
The 43 police forces in England and Wales currently employ 244,000 personnel of whom 143,000 are police and 101,000 civilians.
The review forms part of a wider reform process instituted by the current British government, and contains aspects of cost-cutting that are peculiar to that national situation. As it says, “the service needs modern management tools to operate with the greatest efficiency and economy in a time of considerable financial pressure and restraint.”
Even though our own economy may not admit to “considerable financial pressure and constraint,” there still appear lessons to be learnt from the brief review above. The first is the relevance of the current compensation structure of the Guyana Police Force and the quality of its service to our society as exists today. The answer may well emerge from examining the issues which follow:
a) The extent to which the current compensation structure differentiates between a desk-bound corporal and his/her counterpart involved in criminal investigation, for example.
b) The operational units are more regularly required to work “unsocial hours” and protracted overtime.
c) i) The recognition of the differential required in skills and the extent to which more specialist skills are rewarded.
ii) In this connection the appropriate use of civilian personnel in order to release more police for related duties.
d) A critical contributing factor to productivity is an effective appraisal system, in which not only can pay be reduced for under-performance, but more importantly, is used to celebrate and reward better performances – resulting in increasing morale. Certainly across-the-board awards are counter-productive.
e) The issue of conditions of service – physical and related social support systems – which would partially contribute to fitness physically and psychologically.
f) The consequent implementation of fitness tests.
g) The need for “modern management tools” to operate with greater efficiency and economy – one glaring operational need being for comprehensive information technology to be urgently utilised.
Intricated in all the above is the overriding question of how the society is perceived by the police in terms of criminal activity – ranging from traffic offences, to the several types of violent crime, the variety of white collar crime, including those related to governance systems and procedures.
Such comprehension of a (criminally) knowledge-based portion of the society can only be achieved through the recruitment of a higher level of ‘intelligence’ who can at least profitably utilise the available technology, as well as upgraded policing methodologies to control and abate the incidence of crime.
It is this quality of human resource that can justifiably qualify for the improved compensation measures referred to above.
Yours faithfully,
E B John
