ChezTanker
Granted. However, the main point here is not whether it is "legal" to reduce the pay of those who indicate an intention not to continue to fulfill their whole committment. We work for the Government, and like it or not the Government, via Parliament or other means, decides in practice what is "legal" and what is not. The issue here is one of discrimination, since there are some who suffer a financial penalty for their decision and others who do not. This Government, above all others, is vociferous in trumpeting its committment to anti-discrimination on all sorts of grounds. Yet, where it has the power to do so without risk of significant opposition, it is quite happy to write itself a blank cheque to exclude itself, as an employer, from the consequences of the legislation which it imposes so destructively on others. Where does the brunt of this burden fall? That's right, on those of its employees who are committed, by their nature as well as by their "contract" of employment, not to rebel. I would argue that a Government that so abuses its powers is morally corrupt. You, of course, are free to think otherwise.
Regards
Ginseng