Superannuation Bill

Memorandum submitted by Kenneth Macfadyen (SU 45)

Para 1

I am a 47 year old male who has provided over 26 years loyal public service initially with the Department of Work & Pensions but now with the Identity & Passport Service. I am at the top of my pay scale (£23,096.00) as an Executive Officer and have not had a wage rise now for over four years (With a further two years pay freeze proposed by the present Government).

Para 2

Despite being in a management role and having my performance identified as exceeding the requirements of the grade(s) in every year of my 26 years employment with the Civil Service I find myself earning less that the national average wage. While frustrated that my loyalty has been exploited in this way and despite the fact I could earn more in the private sector I have remained in the civil service. The two reasons for this are that I value Public Service and that I had accrued certain rights due to my loyalty to my employer.

Para 3

It now appears that my employer wishes to remove the rights/benefits I have accrued over the past 26 years. As previously mentioned one of the reasons I remain in the civil service is that I have accrued these benefits. If I thought my employers values/integrity were so poor that they would withdraw accrued rights I would have re-considered my position some time ago. While being offered derisory pay awards in the few years I have been lucky enough to have received one (I have never had one in excess of 3% and that includes tome of high inflation) the accrued benefits and loyalty to public service ensured I remained in the civil service.

Para 4

This government likes to use the word "fair" rather frequently however their actions so far are far from "fair". I accept that being in the public sector leaves me with some terms that are better than the private sector however there are many terms that are worse. I have never heard a Member of Parliament stand up and say that the terms that are worse than the private sector should be improved. It seems this Government is hell-bent on imposing the minimum terms/conditions on the public service.

Para 5

It is clear that the cost of CSCS will be excessive due to all the high earners within the Civil service but it is these very people who are being allowed to leave now prior to any new terms being imposed. If I am to leave under the present (old) terms despite all my service I will walk out with less than the annual salary of an MP (and that is before any MP’s expenses have been claimed).There are repeated suggestions that civil servants will walk out with more than six years salary these staff are few and far between (I am not one) and this does nor reflect the norm.

Para 6

The terms being proposed are unduly harsh, do not protect the low paid, do not target the high earners, are unfair and do not recognise past loyalty. To impose these terms on anyone who earns below the national average salary is to hit the vulnerable groups harder. It is widely accepted that disabled persons, lone parents, carers, ethnic minority etc… have significantly greater representation in the low paid grades. The present terms for the low paid are not unreasonable and will allow people to finance re-training or further education to ensure that they can continue to contribute to society and the economy through future employment.

Para 7

Yes tackle the excesses of the high earners who get privileged treatment and are allowed to exit on packages offered exclusively to them and not departmental wide. If genuinely wanting to protect the low paid this must surely mean those earning less than the national average otherwise how do you define low pay?

Para 9

In conclusion I believe that the existing terms should only be revised for those earning in excess of the national average wage. To reduce the terms for the low paid will result in higher cost to the state in welfare benefits and hinder capable/willing people from re-training or entering further education. It will then trap a new group of people on the welfare state as people will see that the government of the UK has no sense of moral values and disregards accrued rights. These people will see no sense of fairness in the way they have been treated.

September 2010