One of our members recently brought our attention to a job opportunity for Merseyside Police entitled ‘Medical Retirement Officer‘ which attracts a salary between £36,996 and £43,098.
This position was recently posted on their jobs portal (https://jobs.merseyside.police.uk/jobs/#en/sites/CX) a copy of which we have posted below.
There should be nothing unusual about a position such as this I hear you say, but the devil is in the detail.
The introduction says that the team you’ll be working with are a kind, ambitious and diverse team. That’s great to hear, when there is so little empathy and understanding over ill-health and injured officers, a kind person to help administer ill-health and injury pensions is in short supply.
Let’s have a look at some of the requirements from the job description.
To manage the investigation and process of police and staff retirement on the grounds of ill health.
Now that’s a strange requirement to manage the investigation? If an officer has suffered ill-health or an injury on duty, what sort of investigation do they anticipate is needed?
To ensure maximum savings to the force budget through the robust investigation of injury award applications, injury award reviews, medical appeals and reviewing permanently disabled officers who have been retained in service.
So we’ve only had to wait until the second paragraph for the force to show its hand. They are clearly not after an employee that will administer the Police Pension Regulations 2015 (PPR), or The Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 (PIBR) without fear or favour, they want someone to that will save the force as much money as they can regardless of the entitlement or consequences to their officers or pensioners.
Let’s break that sentence down into more detail.
the robust investigation of injury award applications
They require that applications be robustly investigated. What do they mean by investigated, and robustly at that? If an officer has suffered an injury whilst on duty, almost certainly the force would have been aware of it. The question of disability, permanency, whether it was ‘on duty’ and the level of disablement is a medical one and one which MUST be referred to the Selected Medical Practitioner (SMP).
the robust investigation of … injury award reviews
What part of injury reviews does Merseyside Police anticipate will require an investigation? The Medical Retirement Officer is NOT entitled to see any medical information that may be required by the SMP, so what are they investigating?
the robust investigation of … medical appeals
Again, there can only be limited involvement of the Medical Retirement Officer as they are not entitled to see any medical information supplied to the Police Medical Appeal Board (PMAB)
reviewing permanently disabled officers who have been retained in service
A disabled officer that’s been retained will have deemed to have been permanently disabled (until normal retirement age) by a SMP. What do Merseyside Police expect their Medical Retirement Officer to review?
Under the section entitled knowledge and experience –
Knowledge of the Police Pension Regulations and legal precedents are essential, along with associated Home Office guidance relating to issues of pension and injury award.
We’d certainly agree that such an applicant would need to have a good a knowledge of the regulations and case law, but we’re struggling to understand what Home Office guidance they are referring to considering that the Home Office withdrew their Police Medical Appeal Board guidance on 1st September 2022?
A good knowledge of investigative procedures and Force information / intelligence systems
Again, there is a requirement for an investigator and the use of force intelligence systems. What information is held on their force intelligence systems that relate their own officers or pensioners?
Knowledge and understanding of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 with regards to surveillance and investigation of officers and pensioners believed to be falsely claiming compensation.
So there we have it, this role entitled ‘Medical Retirement Officer’ is not really an administrative role, but one designed to spy and investigate it’s own staff and pensioners. It seems as though every injured officer should be aware that they may have someone reading all their social media posts, going through their rubbish, and filming them whilst out shopping!
Analytical skills are required in respect of the calculations of compensation for injury awards and the assessment of earnings capacity in line with Home office guidance.
Now we really have a problem, because the process of determining the loss of earning capacity under the PIBR is a medical one, not one that a civilian should be getting involved in and if they do, it is likely that they will be acting unlawfully in the process. They should play no part in any calculations that relate to injury pensions.
Ability to display tact, sensitivity, confidentiality and diplomacy with individuals who have genuine concerns for their futures, including financial concerns.
Again, we don’t fall out with this sentiment but read on…
A high level of persuasiveness, assertiveness and negotiating skills is required when dealing with matters relating to all aspects of ill-health retirement.
Hang on a minute, why would the role need a high level of persuasiveness? Who needs persuading? What do they need persuading about, not to make a claim, to drop their claim, to agree to a lessor claim?
Assertiveness
Is this another expression for brow-beating a vulnerable individual to agree to something?
Negotiating skills
What is that needs negotiating? The job description has already stated that the application needs to understand the PPR 2015 and the PIBR. There is no negotiating needed. All they need to do is to follow the legislation and current case law.
Decision making skills are required when entering into negotiations regarding continuance of medical appeals, reduction or increase of an officers injury benefit and making recommendations if a member of staff should be retired or not.
Wow! negotiations regarding continuance of medical appeals. This implies more and potentially unlawful pressure on individuals with protected characteristics to drop their medical appeal which they are entitled to do under the regulations
reduction or increase of an officers injury benefit
This requirement is also worrying. Regulation 37(1) of the PIBR determines whether a pensioner’s injury pension is increased or decreased, and this is after the medical determination of a SMP. It is not the role of a medical retirement officer to interfere in this process.
This job vacancy within Merseyside Police, causes us a great deal of concern on how this force will continue to deal with their injured officers and pensioners. We always knew that those leaving this force faced a difficult process due to the individuals involved previously. However, from this advertisement, it now becomes clear why these officers/ pensioners were treated as such. It was all in their job description!
This inflammatory job advert needs to be put in the bin and should never be seen again.
If ever there was a time when our brave officers need full support rather than mixed messaging then that time is right now.
As a retired Merseyside IOD, I am not the least bit surprised at their arrogance at advertising this job description. I know from personal experience how vindictive they can be so God help us with whoever gets the post.
Perhaps a retired IOD or IHR in the area who is still able to work and earn should apply. It would be very interesting to see if they would be offered the job
The requirements, “maximum savings” and “high level of persuasiveness, assertiveness and negotiating skills is required
when dealing with matters relating to all aspects of Ill-health retirement” Those points leapt out of the page at me.
What on earth? is this a job opening for a time share or shady used car salesman?
What persuasiveness, assertiveness and negotiating is there to be done if they are dealing with medical facts. Clearly this appears to not be the case.
They are dealing with sick and injured people who are often at their worst and extremely vulnerable who will clearly be treated in a wholly reprehensible manner with only a view to making maximum savings for the Force.
What happened to Honesty, Integrity and compassion ? Those values are clearly no more.
What an ill thought- out job description / advert placed in writing, available on the internet. By the wording of this job advert, the Force and their ‘HR administrator Heads of people officers’ ( formerly known as personnel clerks ) could have already shot themselves in the foot. It seems it carries a lot of ‘quasi’ responsibility for an admin job. The wording of the job spec, construct of the terminology and poor grammatical presentation has all the hallmarks of a certain member of civilian staff from another familiar police force who may have helped to orchestrate this. I’m sure there will be many heads reeling and wirsing around about this. The qualifications and skills required for this role appear to be rather obscure to say the least, particularly as the individual is required to ‘advise’ medical practitioners and indeed other professionals on the decision – making processes required, yet they don’t seem to be required to be qualified in : law, medicine, allied health, mental health for example? Perhaps the most poignant ‘essential skills’ should be listed as: vindictiveness, lack of compassion and the ability to conform and put the organization first above any other moral and ethical contextual issues. There is such a lot of potential in terms of margin for error for the successful appointee. If this is an attempt for the Force to make savings, they should be aware that it is more likely to increase their spending and outgoings as it opens up a snake pit with a plethora of additional roles that will be required to clear up the inevitable resultant mess! The wording of this job description alone already implicates them for more legal challenges to come. But they never learn do they…………………….
It doesn’t come as any surprise to read this job description. Anyone who has been through an injury on duty retirement and subsequent reviews really understands the meaning of “the job will look after you.” It is a bare-faced lie.
It could be argued that, as recruits, we were deceived about what would happen if we were injured carrying out a dangerous job. We were consistently told we would be looked after when all the hidden evidence suggests the exact opposite, that we would be despised and seen as an undeserving financial burden that the job would use fair means and foul to relieve itself of. I look on with envy at colleagues who were fortunate enough to see out their service without serious injury. For them they breathe a sigh of relief, the stint is over and a generous pension is there for their futures. For us, we don’t ever get to relax and feel secure. I dread every morning when the post arrives. It feels inevitable that that dreaded letter will arrive one day. It is no way to live, even without the physical and mental pain I endure daily. I have told numerous aspiring recruits what was done to me and I am delighted to say that all have changed their minds about joining up. And this is where I believe we should fight back against the organisation. It is pure folly to fight on the battlefield of your opponents choosing. Informing the public, with evidence, about how you will be treated if you are injured on duty as a police officer will create problems with recruitment. The job and government will have to change its ways in how it treats us to rectify this problem. There is money in this country for everything except the deserving. This needs to change. They don’t fight fair and neither should we. Our livelihoods depend on winning.
I remember when you were signed off sick a nice sgt or inspector used to pop around your home or sit in a unmarked car to check your welfare, (i told my partner not to answer the door to anyone) they would monitor if you went out and where ,altruistic behavior for your benefit , i see times havent changed,
These days RIPA prevents a sergeant or inspector lurking outside a house and conducting directed surveillance on a poorly PC within.
Of course, you can be sure the incumbent of this post will do the paperwork and obtain a suitable RIPA authority before snooping on Facebook pages etc of IODs. I’m sure they will assiduously dot those i’s and cross those t’s.
To fail do do so could be a potential Misconduct in a Public Office offence, triable on indictment only…
I’m sure there will be a few SARs in due course and this will unravel badly for someone.
Nuff said!
This is an absolute disgrace. As Police Officers we were trusted to be fair and have integrity however after 20-30 years displaying this without question we are suddenly deemed as untrustworthy and to have zero integrity only because we have had to leave the job we loved and not to be able to finish our chosen career due to no fault of our own being unfit for duty due to ill health caused by no fault of our own being injured on duty.
I have witnessed this personally whilst at an PMAB where my integrity was directly challenged by a force representative who I had never met but questioned my integrity only for the reason that I had the audacity to make an ill health pension/injury on duty award to whip I am entitled to in order to make up my employed working income. This force representative went totally against all of my medical evidence from vastly qualified medical consultants and on a whim made totally unjustified claims about me questioning my integrity.
If you read the headlines of this job description it is solely for the reason to reduce ill health payments to injured officers. It does one of the fundamentals we were all taught at police training school NOT TO TAR EVERY ONE WITH THE SAME BRUSH. I am sure just like everything else in the past some injured officers have tried to increase their award payments by extending the truth but that does not mean all injured officers are the same.
I had 22 years service during which my integrity was never questioned but because I was injured on duty and as a result could no longer perform my career I suddenly have no integrity and I am looked upon as lying despite all of my medical evidence.
The advertised role should be to support injured on duty cops and not to persecute them ( which is obvious from job description wording)
Does this happen with other public services such as the Fire Brigade or our Military. I think NOT.
It is an absolute disgrace and needs to be challenged to the highest court. Without doubt injured on duty officers are being targeted and persecuted just for one reason and that is to save individual Police Forces MONEY. No other reason!!!!
What a DISGRACE
I’m sure, to appoint a suitably immoral individual, the closing date for this illustrious position should be 1st April, before midday of course.
Blimey, this is awful.
It’s the most stressful period going through IOD, without forces going out of their way to make it worse. Shame on them .
In 2008 I sat in the office of an SMP, who after examing me and reading all the reports that related to my injury on duty came to the conclusion that I was entitled to an IOD award.
3 months later I received a letter that concluded that I was NOT entitled to an IOD award – this time it was not written from perspective of a medical conclusion but on the basis of case law that existed at the time. It had allegedly been written by the same doctor. A leading barrister recently concluded that there was some doubts as to whether that SMP could have written that letter based on law as opposed to his specialist subject of medical services.
The time from the SMP telling me I was entitled to an award to me receiving the letter was 3 months. That original decision had been forwarded to none other than the Merseyside Police.
I know what they are capable of. I know they want to portray one of all staff being part of the Police Family but the reality is that if you become injured then they will turn on you like a rabid dog.
This job description furthers my belief that they, like a lot of other Police Forces cannot be trusted.
I truly feel sorry for Police Officers who become injured because they will receive little or no support from the management but instead have to turn to outside agencies like IODPA to get to the truth of how they should be treated and what they are actually entitled to receive.
Good luck people.. this is an ongoing massive issue.
I am appalled by this.
It screams that senior management regard all their staff as being fundamentally dishonest, despite their being well-vetted guardians of the law. Should there be an individual suspicion of dishonesty then that should be properly investigated, but we all know how rigorous IHR and IOD awards already are.
There is a complete lack of empathy for injured officers and those in poor health – poor health that has often been exacerbated by the demands of their public service.
I hope the Federation take the force to task over this despicable attitude.
Furthermore the salary bracket is ridiculously high. Support staff should be just that, and the number of those being paid a higher salary than the front line they are there to supposedly support should be an absolute minimum. The amount of empire-building within police support staff over the past few years has been truly shocking.
If there was ever a document that screamed the definition for Conspiracy To Commit Fraud, then this is it!
Professional Standards Department and the Federation need to address this matter as it appears it falls nothing short of criminal.
Investigate which individuals complied this document, agreed up on it and signed it off, then arrest and suspend them.
The intent is clearly there in the document.
It is that simple.
Absolutely shocking!! Shows what the Forces across the country really think of us. Very very worrying indeed
In some ways, this job offer is helpful to us. It is in black and white and can be shown in a court of law, the depths this force is willing to go to in order to prevent an injured officer/civilian from getting what is rightfully theirs. Hopefully this will come back and bite them where it hurts most.
The person leaving the current post. We know who it is! Will have penned this based on their owen (sic) role experience. The newcomer will already have been chosen from within
This wage would be better spent on employing a health care professional to provide care an understanding for anyone subject to the IOD process. This advert just undermines injured officers honestly and integrity. It’s basically saying that any officers applying for IOD awards are submitting fraudulent applications until proven to be a suitable application by this investigator.
How terrible. Very poor indeed. If the ill health process wasn’t already upsetting enough, this just makes me feel physically sick. All credit to IODPA for raising it, I hope it gets totally legally demolished. Really just awful.
Mersey side police and all the others should hang there heads in shame. I hear all the time that the medical retirement process is complicated, its not ,you do a dangerous job all day every day, No surprise you get injured, you get treated , you don’t get better, medics say you are no longer fit ,thats it. In most cases your are messed up for the rest of your life after serving the public keeping them from harm.
What is there to investigate, what has RIPA got to do with this.
Lets spy on the police officer or the veteran and conduct illegal investigations to save some money that we can waste else where. What sort of “person” does this apart from the Owens person and others similar types who don’t have a clue what being IOD is like. Ive been out 10 years and in some ways my injurys are worse and will go with me to the grave.
They need to add to the job description “no morals or compassion required as essential” it would also be helpful if you are prepared to break the law when required.
Disgusting Merseyside and all the others across the uk, there pretty much all on the same level in the treatment go injured cops.
Anyone thinking of joining Merseyside Police should not bother. Now you know that running towards danger to protect others when everyone else is running away is not valued by this outfit.
If you are seriously injured and unable to continue with your career we now know how they will treat you.
At least this is their intention. although of course this policy will fail every legal challenge at every step.
But it’s their intention which is the devil in the detail, the law enforcement agency known as Merseyside Police are clearly unconcerned by acting unlawfully themselves.
If I was serving there now I would transfer elsewhere and if I was thinking of joining I would change my mind.
The Chief Constable needs to get a grip of this shameful attitude towards officers who are disabled in the course of their duty.
How about employing someone to investigate the mindset of some of the desk jockeys who dream up such damaging nonsense?!
Over to you Chief Constable, many eyes are watching.
It seems that once again the law applies to everyone other than police HR departments.
“The pen is mightier than the sword” the choice of words in this advert is at best unfortunate at worst a clear indication of Merseyside’s intentions. A sad indictment of the “compassion” on offer
A page full on nonsense, dissected with skill and ease.
Is there actually anything in this to worry about apart from knowing that the type of person who will fill the role is to what is to be expected? No cloak, curtain to hide behind now.
I wonder who is already on whatdotheyknow.com asking for the Home Office Guidance, which will be the already withdrawn document.
Shame for them that what’s held on an individual can be applied for by that individual. Has there yet been a case where someone has applied for the information which has been denied, refused, rejected etc but then relied upon by the organisation at a subsequent hearing?
Don’t tell me that Mr Owens is finally retiring? I can see now why myself and other police officers were treated like we were, as I am guessing that this job description is nothing new.
It is shameful to read this and it makes my skin crawl.
Who on earth would ever want to join such a hideous organisation who treat injured officers in such a way? Getting injured is the very nature of this particular job. To know that those of us who need that care and support will be met by someone who gives not a s*** about their wellbeing and is only thinking about how to screw vulnerable people.
Iodpa with all seriousness who do we complain to with this? As a MerPol officer, having been put through and still going through hell with this process?
All that is wrong in the treatment of officers injured in the course of their duties is reflected in this job description.
Shame on the PPA of Merseyside Police for allowing this to be published.
It will be worth officers keeping hold of that job description to potentially use in any future proceedings. As we know, the focus, which is abundantly clear here, is on rhe forces budget, not on its injured officers. Extraordinary advert for all the wrong reasons.
merseyside police you are an absolute disgrace ! have we not suffered enough at the end of our. careers ? how dare you employ a witch hunt against those of us that gave our lives and livelihood to public service . what rhe hell are you doing to your colleagues who are suffering ? disgusting !!!
My first reaction is to enquire as to which individual or group of individuals within Merseyside Police are responsible for formulating this ‘job description’?. They clearly have no understanding of the Injury Regs or the processes involved and are either badly informed, totally incompetent or maliciously biased (more than likely a combination of all of these) If they really want to save the Force some money they should scrap the idea of this new post and/or better still, resign from their own miserable jobs.
It’s always about saving money and reducing IOD/IHR pensions. They would bd better served by employing more staff to look after officer’s welfare and support them in the hope that this would reduce the numbers needing to retire on health grounds.
As a retired Police Officer with an IOD award, who has suffered at the hands of my own force, this is a very worrying blog and I fear for any Merseyside Officer, bother serving, or retired, who hopes to be treated properly when injured in the course of duty.
My main worry comes from knowing the previous underhand tricks by this police force, and others, as they try to save money from pensioners and injured officers, who in their eyes, “drain the coffers without giving anything back”.
You see, like me, all of these officers no doubt believed all the hype about being part of a ‘police family’; that if I put my life on the line, then I would be helped and supported’; that my absolute loyalty was required to do the job and which I then naively gave without question!
Unfortunately, as myself and hundreds of other serving and former officers have found out, this is all a lie, and is a management mechanism used to scam, now injured and vulnerable people, when they are in times of their greatest need.
The paragraph highlighted that states “A high level of persuasiveness, assertiveness and negotiating skills is required when dealing with matters relating to all aspects of ill-health retirement.” , particularly worries me.
This person, the MRO, will obviously engage with an officer, who is probably:
1. In pain from their physical injuries, or
2. Is suffering mental health issues, from their role and experiences.
3. Is no doubt worried about their future career, their family and their responsibilities.
So what will the “high level of persuasiveness” be used for? Unfortunately, in my experience, it will be to the benefit of the force and the detriment of the injured officer.
How do I know this? Well, my own former force, who were unfortunately at the forefront of a ‘War’ against its own IOD pensioners, has, and continues to develop new tactics, hoping to save money on pensions.
Having really struggled to win with retired IOD’s, this latest tactic, is to try to drive out the injured serving officer, by applying unfair pressures to make them resign, rather than go through an increasingly challenging Ill Health Retirement process. Why? Because If the injured officer resigns, then that saves money!
You may tell me that I’m just cynical of my old force, but isn’t what I’ve just illustrated, likely to be part of this Merseyside MRO activities? If not what is this high level needed for?
It is unfortunately, a very clever ploy by them, because at this stage, the injured officer is not yet properly classified as a disabled person, (which once recognised, brings with it some protections), although all the requirements, I.e. the injuries are present.
No doubt similar ploys will be used against retired naive IOD’s, who enter the biased and unfair reassessment process too. The old loyalty will be used against them.
How do we warn those officers in Merseyside? Well other than having a warning statement tattooed onto the forehead of the MRO stating something similar to those on cigarette packets….”This person will harm your health and wellbeing”, the only thing we can do, (and I note IODPA gets better at doing), is to get that message out there to our serving and former colleagues.
What a sad reflection on a once proud service, that it now steeps to even lower levels to save money!
.
Why not produce an advert asking for someone willing to break the law in overt language? Anyone with an ounch of understanding of the regulations, and any moral compass, will not apply, but someone with no empathy will do well in this role, to the absolute detriment of the very people the regulations were written to ensure support to. I remember being told “Put your life on the line and should the worst happen, we’ll ensure that you and your family are looked after.” Appalling! But why am I not surprised?
Whoever wrote the job description should be sacked for total incompetence. Where did this thinking come from in the first place, the Chief Constable or the Police and Crime Commissioner?
Will the information in this application form be passed onto a solicitor used by yourselves to dissect this and make further note for when needed? Very worrying
Now I envisage a regular illegal abuse of RIPA legislation from it being liberally used in circumstances it doesn’t cover in the name of saving money
Thank you again for bringing this to the attention of those going through ill health retirement and those in the other side of it. So discouraging the level of suspicion and contempt the Executive ranks show for injured officers. Even now, 6 years after medical retirement I have relapsed into more significant ill health. This can be the case for many as a result of their original injury. Yet, the gratitude for putting our own health at safety at the bottom of our priorities to do our duties as Police officers is treated with utter contempt shown in what should be held up as a shameful disregard for the process, the regulations and the actual permitted remit breached in this job description. The anxiety for us all continues. You never really get to leave the Police Service do you?
I could understand if this was written by a 14 year old as a school project but I shudder to think how the Merseyside Police are running their service if someone in authority thought that this was in any form acceptable.
This must make any serving officer who puts his life on the line in the execution of his duty and often risks series injury or worse, wonder if the risk is truly worth it !
No wonder retention in the police service is going from bad to worse..
Yet another manufactured role to continue to harass and belittle someone’s award or disability
I’m honestly shocked (but not really). How the hell do they think they’ll get away with this? Let them hang themselves. They sad and despicable part of this is some poor soul/s is/are going to suffer as a result!! Shame on you Merseyside. Absolutely abhorrent.