The second part of the Winsor review into police service reform has recommended a radical shake-up of recruitment, assessment and pay, as well as new powers to make police officers’ roles redundant.

New pay scales, annual fitness tests, skills-based payments and the ability to hire directly into the ranks of chief constable and superintendent were all proposals outlined in the report from former rail regulator Tom Winsor. The review argued that it was unjust that only civilian police staff could be made redundant at a time of budget cuts, and advocated “a power akin to compulsory severance for police officers”.

But will the sweeping changes enable the creation of a “more skilled and effective workforce fit to face the challenges of the next 30 years” as Winsor suggested?

Former HR director of the Metropolitan Police Martin Tiplady described the redundancy move as “entirely right”, and a necessary alternative to the use of the A19 pensions regulation – currently the only way to enforce the departure of officers after 30 years’ service.

“Nobody wants to make anyone redundant, but the fact that it was a missing power in police regulations was a mistake,” Tiplady said. “The only way police officers can be moved on is when they are at retirement age and can be compulsorily retired. Using those powers is wrong when we want to retain experience – particularly in an Olympic year.”

However, he disagreed with the proposal to allow the parachuting of external candidates directly into senior policing roles. “Unless they have the operational experience, it would be very hard for somebody to gain the kudos and respect of the officers they are leading,” he explained.

Tiplady, who is now MD of Chameleon People Solutions, welcomed the aim of improving officer fitness, but warned that if there were a penalty for failing fitness tests, then constabularies would have to examine their responsibilities as employers to provide training time and gym facilities.

He added that HR departments in police forces would have a critical role in the management and communication of the changes in the report, should they be adopted by home secretary Teresa May.
“I hope that HR functions will look at Winsor and make it work for them to drive better performance in their organisation, rather than just see it as another set of proposals to change the pay agenda,” he said.

However, Police Federation chairman Paul McKeever said the recommendations had been met with “anger and resentment” from rank and file officers, coming after a series of pay freezes, pension contribution increases and headcount reductions.

He said that removing officers’ protection from redundancy would negatively affect the way they do their jobs because it would “compromise their ability to act independently, without fear of adverse influence”.

McKeever told PM that officers would fear the workforce changes were part of an agenda of encouraging privatisation, and that, combined with budget cuts, police forces would become highly stretched and less flexible. “A very important aspect of policing is having the resilience to deal with unexpected levels of demand, such as during last year’s riots,” he said.

Vanessa Robinson, CIPD head of HR practice development, said that police HR departments now face a challenge that is typical of many public-sector organisations in the current financial climate, that of bringing about a new psychological contract.

“The assumptions and beliefs that have been founded in a lot of public-sector organisations in the past aren’t going to work in the future, so that whole relationship needs repositioning,” she explained. “The role of leaders at this time will be vital. The work the CIPD has done around trust has shown it is a lot easier to maintain it than try to restore it.”