Progression pay hit
Thread Starter
Progression pay hit
Well, that is it. Due to the direct link between Gov policy and the AFPRB, future pay reviews will claw back any progression pay benefit you thought had escaped the latest hit on those who have no choice, or union, or rights. 
OAP
OAP
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Que? The armed forces were specifically stated to be exempted from the ending of public sector pay progression.
Last edited by BruisedCrab; 26th Jun 2013 at 17:49. Reason: Soz for the smiley title, fat fingers slim iPhone
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OAP
It's ok.
Spending Review: Osborne Wields The Axe Again
It's ok.
Spending Review: Osborne Wields The Axe Again
The Ministry of Defence will see its budget maintained in cash terms at £24bn, which will mean a real-terms cut of 1.9%, but money for equipment will rise by 1% a year.
Its capital budget will also be held at £8.7bn, representing a real-terms reduction of 2.3%.
There will be no further reductions in troop levels, although the Chancellor confirmed the civilian workforce will be slashed.
And fines levied against banks for the Libor rate-rigging scandal will be used to fund the Armed Forces Covenant, setting out the nation's obligation to troops in perpetuity.
The Chancellor insisted his measures, which only spared schools, the NHS, overseas aid and the intelligence services, were necessary and fair.
Nurses, police officers and teachers will all be hit by the loss of progressive pay, which sees them earn more each year regardless of performance, with only the armed forces exempt.
Its capital budget will also be held at £8.7bn, representing a real-terms reduction of 2.3%.
There will be no further reductions in troop levels, although the Chancellor confirmed the civilian workforce will be slashed.
And fines levied against banks for the Libor rate-rigging scandal will be used to fund the Armed Forces Covenant, setting out the nation's obligation to troops in perpetuity.
The Chancellor insisted his measures, which only spared schools, the NHS, overseas aid and the intelligence services, were necessary and fair.
Nurses, police officers and teachers will all be hit by the loss of progressive pay, which sees them earn more each year regardless of performance, with only the armed forces exempt.
Last edited by lj101; 26th Jun 2013 at 17:51.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: .
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing more than idle speculation. Your pay increments will not disappear at the next AFPRB, or the NEM. I would bet my pension on it...perhaps fewer increments over the same period to reach the same pay.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,077
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
I for one am glad the Civil Service annual pay rises have been removed, the rest of the Country do not get them and indeed a lot of people haven't had one for years, some even taking pay drops to ensure redundancies do not happen in their workplaces.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,077
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
NO..
Not in the slightest.
Not in the slightest.
From my perspective I cannot remember having an automatic pay rise within the MoD as a CS for many, many of years. No problem with levelling the playing field but the trouble is the way the media has reported this issue makes it appear that the majority of Civil Servants get this perk when in fact the opposite is true.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hove
Age: 72
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nutloose, I don't know what its like for the civvies in the services but with the police support staff it was not quite the pay rise every year that a lot of folk think it is.
For my role, and others were similar, we had a set scale for the job which was three pay scales. Within each of these pay scales were two other increments.
So when I started I was on the bottom. For that I took emergency calls and I got a small increase for two years then they stopped until I passed various courses, became a radio operator and so moved up to the next scale. Again I did more courses to operate more kit and moved up to the final pay scale. Once I got to the top of that scale I stayed there for 19 years and the only increases I got were for inflation. Each pay increase was about 2k per pay scale with the yearly steps around 700 pounds
Indeed we got clobbered before not long after I started when we got a below inflation rise for three years with a promise it would be made up later, that bit never happened and over the 24 years I did the job we never got to keep up with price indexes.
My last salary before I retired was less than a Flying Officer on level 10 and that was with 20 per cent extra for working 24/7 shifts.
For my role, and others were similar, we had a set scale for the job which was three pay scales. Within each of these pay scales were two other increments.
So when I started I was on the bottom. For that I took emergency calls and I got a small increase for two years then they stopped until I passed various courses, became a radio operator and so moved up to the next scale. Again I did more courses to operate more kit and moved up to the final pay scale. Once I got to the top of that scale I stayed there for 19 years and the only increases I got were for inflation. Each pay increase was about 2k per pay scale with the yearly steps around 700 pounds
Indeed we got clobbered before not long after I started when we got a below inflation rise for three years with a promise it would be made up later, that bit never happened and over the 24 years I did the job we never got to keep up with price indexes.
My last salary before I retired was less than a Flying Officer on level 10 and that was with 20 per cent extra for working 24/7 shifts.
Last edited by clicker; 26th Jun 2013 at 23:16.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,077
Received 2,942 Likes
on
1,253 Posts
I get where your coming from Clicker, but you were getting pay awards at the rate of inflation, so you were staying at a level.
I know people that haven't had a rise for about 5 odd years who are in effect going backwards in their earnings.
I know one guy started at a Company on a competitive wage, he worked there for 7 and never once got a rise despite asking, eventually he had to leave the job he loved as he simply couldn't afford to stay, the Company then had to take on a replacement, found of course they couldn't find anyone as good nor as experienced for the money, so had to employ a less skilled chap on a higher more competitive wage.... And hence the merry go round started again with the new guy, no pay rises etc..
I know people that haven't had a rise for about 5 odd years who are in effect going backwards in their earnings.
I know one guy started at a Company on a competitive wage, he worked there for 7 and never once got a rise despite asking, eventually he had to leave the job he loved as he simply couldn't afford to stay, the Company then had to take on a replacement, found of course they couldn't find anyone as good nor as experienced for the money, so had to employ a less skilled chap on a higher more competitive wage.... And hence the merry go round started again with the new guy, no pay rises etc..
Have to say I am with Nutloose on this. It makes no economic sense to exempt a sector of public services if the government wants to trim the budget and control inflation. It's a bummer for everybody. Many people in private sector have taken massive pay cuts in order to try to save their employer and avoid redundancy, and it's their taxes that pay for these non-performance related automatic pay rises. Should be same rule for all public sector.
Have to say I am with Nutloose on this. It makes no economic sense to exempt a sector of public services if the government wants to trim the budget and control inflation. It's a bummer for everybody. Many people in private sector have taken massive pay cuts in order to try to save their employer and avoid redundancy, and it's their taxes that pay for these non-performance related automatic pay rises. Should be same rule for all public sector.
Thread Starter
The trouble is that now the Gov has decided that progression pay is a bad thing, the AFPRB will have to factor it as a perk in their "pay comparison" equation. This will depress overall Service pay in future AFPRB reviews. Service personel will be worse off almost as if the progression pay had been cut anyway!
OAP
OAP
The trouble is that now the Gov has decided that progression pay is a bad thing
Plus, by doing away with the incremements you potentially move to bigger bigger pay rises on promotion as the gap your representative pay band between ranks will be bigger than the current gaps between the current top level / bottom levels as you climb the ranks. A nice juicy pay rise might seem good from a morale perspective, but it does potentially run the risk of incurring a pension related tax bill as a bigger jump in salary will potentially put your new, increased pension closer to the annual contribution limits.
Plus, I have to say I don't have a great deal of sympathy for people in the private sector moaning about how bad it is - part of me thinks that chickens are simply coming home to roost. For too long in the 90s and 00s, there were elements coining it in with their bonuses and jollies, all on the back of an unsustainable economic model of producing frankly over priced, poor value goods and services. Now that model is unravelling and we are seeing the past decade's economic boom for what it actually was - a case of the Emperor's new clothes. Whilst all that was going on, the Armed Forces were getting no bonuses, sub-inflationary pay progression and a generally deteriorating set of Ts&Cs. And now we are expected to fall on our swords just to satisfy the politics of envy? Really?!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hove
Age: 72
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair point NutLoose and happy to give ground accordingly.
Does remind me however of discussions in the control room wondering if 31k (including the 20% shift allowance) was fair pay that what we did.
As an example I was one of two controllers that was on duty at Shoreham airport when the Hurricane crashed (And got no thanks from our command for the hard work we did that day)
Does remind me however of discussions in the control room wondering if 31k (including the 20% shift allowance) was fair pay that what we did.
As an example I was one of two controllers that was on duty at Shoreham airport when the Hurricane crashed (And got no thanks from our command for the hard work we did that day)
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I can see the point in pay progression (using only the military pattern) where someone long time serving in the rank will have gathered, and hopefully use, their wealth of experience gained through time.
Looking at officers pay, I believe the AFPRB set progression limits based on expected time in the rank. For instance after, I think 6 years, a flt lt could expect to be promoted to sqn ldr or have topped at his rank/time experience level.
In earlier days a Cranwell flt lt on the General List had his pay progression frozen at the 6 year point. A Supplementary List officer, who was expected to retire at no later that age 38 we granted pay progression each year. When that was abandoned and we all reached full scale at the 6 year point I benefited by jumping some 12 years worth
.
That CS now no longer earn pay progression (and I see it was not wholesale across all Ministries) might seem equable or unjust depending on how you look at it. On one course we had a brand new direct-entry D-grade CS, so brand new he blushed when he had to answer a question. No way was he worth the same salary as a long serving D-grade CS. I would call that unjust.
Looking at officers pay, I believe the AFPRB set progression limits based on expected time in the rank. For instance after, I think 6 years, a flt lt could expect to be promoted to sqn ldr or have topped at his rank/time experience level.
In earlier days a Cranwell flt lt on the General List had his pay progression frozen at the 6 year point. A Supplementary List officer, who was expected to retire at no later that age 38 we granted pay progression each year. When that was abandoned and we all reached full scale at the 6 year point I benefited by jumping some 12 years worth
.That CS now no longer earn pay progression (and I see it was not wholesale across all Ministries) might seem equable or unjust depending on how you look at it. On one course we had a brand new direct-entry D-grade CS, so brand new he blushed when he had to answer a question. No way was he worth the same salary as a long serving D-grade CS. I would call that unjust.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They could always do what they did a few years ago and increase the number of increments within each rank. Fairly sure it used to be 6 increments before it rose to 9.
EDIT: April 2001 it rose from 6 to 9 increments.
EDIT: April 2001 it rose from 6 to 9 increments.
Last edited by Willard Whyte; 27th Jun 2013 at 16:13.
When I was in local government (70s) there was a move by NALGO, their union, to abandon incremental points (usually 4 levels in each grade then, before the spinal scale) on the grounds that the top level was "the rate for the job" and everyone on that band should be paid at that rate. Employers did n ot agree and, ISTR, suggested that "the rate" was the lowest point on the scale, and everyone should get that.........unsurprisingly the whole idea went quiet!