Today Chief Constable Gareth Morgan, the Staffordshire Chief Constable placed an open letter on his website regarding the forces recent Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 reviews under Section 37(1), and the recent resignation of his Selected Medical Practitioner (SMP) – Dr Vivian, who informed us last week that performing the role of a SMP in relation to these reviews had, “been a major burden”.
It was our intention to seek permission to reproduce the open letter here, but as Mr Morgan who is a prolific Twitter user, has previously blocked us, we were unable to ask. The article has been marked as an open letter, and so we will reproduce it here in it’s entirety, and also provide a link to the original so you may read it in all it’s glory.
Pension review of retired Injured on Duty (IoD) officers
On 26 April 2017 Staffordshire Police began a pension review of retired Injured on Duty (IoD) officers in accordance with Reg. 37 (1) of the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 which places a duty upon the Police Pension Authority (the Chief Constable) to review whether the degree of the pensioners’ disablement has altered. Injury Benefit pensions (commonly known as Injury Awards) are granted to retired officers who have been medically assessed as being between Band 1 (slight disablement) to Band 4 (very severe disablement). By law a review cannot result in an injury pensioner being reduced to less than Band 1 so they are never removed in their entirety.
Since this time, and after confirming my intention to continue the reviews after my arrival as Chief Constable, there has been misinformation and misrepresentation of facts in what appears to be an attempt to besmirch the professional reputation of independent medical practitioners and Staffordshire Police. A small number of individuals have set out to campaign against these reviews in a manner which my staff have described as akin to harassment and intimidation – much of it on line and in the public domain.
I have always recognised that these reviews can cause concern and we have committed to expediting the process for that reason. I recognise that everyone is entitled to a view and are allowed to express it. However, the conduct of individuals is such that the independent Senior Medical Practitioner (SMP) no longer wishes to conduct injury assessments for retired officers at this time. The assertion circulating that the SMP left because he was being required to follow the instructions of the force and act unethically is entirely without foundation.
Every care is taken to ensure the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 and related case law are adhered to. I reviewed the process and sought legal and HR advice before confirming my intention to continue the reviews. I am entirely confident that the procedures comply with the regulations and are lawful, both in the way Staffordshire Police conducts itself and in the actions of the SMP.
So far, reviews have commenced for 34 people. To date, 13 have been completed and have reached outcomes, of which four IoD pensioners have had their banding reduced to Band 1. To date, three of these pensioners have stated their intention to appeal as is their right in accordance with the Regulations. Appeals are conducted by the Police Medical Appeal Board, which is independent of Staffordshire Police.
The pension benefit review has not been held in the interests of money saving and no savings are assumed in our forecast budget plans. In fact, the total cost to Staffordshire Police for IoD pensioners amounts to £3 million per annum.
The review is to ensure we are ethical and proportionate in the way that we use public money and to ensure there is a fair and consistent approach to all. The review will ensure that the pensioners continue to receive the appropriate level of award.
I acknowledge we have a duty of care to support IoD pensioners and we are fully committed to providing that support to the most professional of standards. This covers all 360 IoD pensioners we have in Staffordshire. I also have a duty of care to my staff which is why I am writing this letter to iterate that I will not tolerate the treatment they have recently received.
I would ask that everyone reads the information that clearly outlines the review process on our website pages. Appeals, complaints and concerns should be submitted through formal channels and not aired in such a way that discredits the working practices of my colleagues who are simply carrying out their lawful and legal duties.
Chief Constable, Staffordshire Police
21 Dec 2017 17:00:08 GMT
He has stated that reviews are not being conducted to save money.
He has also stated that no-one can be reduced below a band one, despite Staffordshire Police clearly threatening to suspend awards if the IOD does not comply with their demands. (here is the before and after).
What saddens us is the need to blame extremely poorly pensioners for the reason for Dr Vivian to withdraw from the process.
We wonder how the Regulations and case law is being adhered to when we read there are at least three pensioners who are appealing.
Also, what was the end result of the other nine pensioners?
We notice that Mr Morgan has blocked any comments being placed after the article on the Staffordshire Police website, which sort of makes his rant one way. Never mind, we’ll be happy to accept your comments! As always, please make them constructive.
Finally we have to ask, is a “Senior Medical Practitioner”, a SMP who is somehow superior in position or authority to an ordinary “Selected Medical Practitioner”? Answers on a postcard.
110 thoughts on “Chief Constable Morgan’s open letter”
This message has been sent from the heart sound reasoning hope it hits one of his strings
Dear Mr Morgan
As we enter another new year I wonder how many lives our brave Police officers will save and protect despite the risk of danger and death they will face in doing so? We will hear the politicians again commend these brave men and women for running towards danger when others are running away. You know “The Job” is a unique profession and only we know about the demands, pressure and expectation placed upon us. Whatever anyone else may think we know it is a high risk and very stressful occupation, but one which also provides job satisfaction and great comradeship. You Sir know all of this to be true. So please reconsider and even challenge your own thoughts and policy on the very unfair and illegal process of mass reviews, including the unlawful threats to provide irrelevant disclosure. I suggest you do know deep down that this is only about trying to save money. It is wrong you have been put in this position but you do have the power to say no. Please think about what these former officers have now lost. In many cases they have lost everything, including their health, career, marriage, home, friends and sanity. I know of two former Officers in this very position and it’s a tragedy. Lawful reviews will always be respected and adhered too but why should these sick former officers now be hounded with such contempt and disregard. You know this is unfair. You are still in “The Job” and you can stop this now. Please do not allow politicians and HR pen pushers to cloud your judgement. They have never been where “we” have all been and they will never understand the true nature of what we do. They may not care about that, but you really should care as you know the truth. I pray you can find the strength to do the right thing before it’s too late. If not I’m afraid to say you are heading towards disaster, as the law will prevail as it always does.
Comments are closed.