28.09.17
New Civil Service exit pay plans ‘remove hard-won protections’
The government has published a consultation on the Civil Service Compensation Scheme (CSCS) setting out terms for voluntary exit and voluntary redundancy which are less generous than those that were quashed by a court ruling in August.
The new consultation proposes a maximum salary of £80,000 on which an exit payment can be based, with a maximum tariff of three weeks’ pay per year of service and a ceiling of 15 months’ salary that can be paid as a redundancy payment – down from the 18 months proposed last year.
The new plan will see the value of lump sum compensation taper as an employee nears their normal pension retirement age. Employer-funded early access to pension as an exit term will be limited or ended through either capping the amount of employer-funded ‘top-ups’, removing the ability of employers to make such top-ups, or by increasing the minimum age at which an individual is able to receive a top-up.
Prospect Union has warned that it will “robustly hold the government to account” over the consultation.
Garry Graham, its deputy general secretary, said: “Prospect warned that the judicial review taken by PCS provided the excuse and opportunity the government wanted to table worse terms than were ultimately negotiated and signed up to by eight unions including Prospect, FDA, Unite, UNISON and others in 2016.
“By being determined to remain at the bargaining table arguing on behalf of our members, the terms Prospect negotiated included significant protections for the lowest paid and increased the maximum available for those leaving on voluntary redundancy from the initially tabled 12 months’ salary to 18 months.
“Prospect will be responding robustly to the consultation and as ever will remain at the bargaining table arguing on behalf of members. We will be holding the government to account and expect them to honour their commitments.”
FDA assistant general secretary, Naomi Cooke, has also criticised the proposed terms, arguing: “This is a major backwards step. This new consultation proposes worse terms than those negotiated by the FDA and seven other unions last year, and removes a series of hard-won protections.
“The FDA chose to take part in the 2016 negotiations to avoid the imposition of more stringent terms by the government, securing a series of concessions in the final round of negotiations which have all now been dropped from these latest proposals.
“We are adamant that the new CSCS should be no worse than the reformed scheme which was agreed in good faith and was backed by 89% of our members in a ballot last year. We will be making robust representations to the Cabinet Office to honour the 2016 agreement.”
Have you got a story to tell? Would you like to become a PSE columnist? If so, click here.