Public sector pay review bodies 2009: Government imposes pay restraint on senior staff

This feature looks at the pay awards received by police officers, the armed forces, the judiciary, senior civil servants and "very senior managers" in the NHS, along with parliamentary pay rises. Although the Government has accepted the recommendations for some of these groups, it has reduced the recommended pay awards for many senior public sector workers.

On this page:
Police officers agree three-year deal
Armed forces
      Bonuses and allowances
Review Body on Senior Salaries
      Senior civil service
      Second year of three-year settlement for senior civil service
      Government response
       Union reaction
      Reforming senior civil service reward
      Civil service retirement and severance terms
      Senior officers in the armed forces
      X-factor
      Job evaluation
      Judiciary
       "Very senior managers" in the NHS
      2009 pay award
      Government response
       Review of the pay framework for senior NHS managers
Members of Parliament
Ministerial pay
Table 1: Summary of pay review body awards covered in this feature
Table 2: Police pay ranges, 1 September 2008
Table 3: Armed forces pay examples, 1 April 2009
Table 4: Senior civil service pay band values, 1 April 2009
Table 5: Senior military officer pay scales, 2009 and 2010
Table 6: Judicial salaries, 1 April 2009
Table 7: Pay bands for chief executives in the NHS, 1 April 2009
Additional resources on XpertHR.

Key points

  • The Government has not accepted the majority of the 2009 pay recommendations of the Review Body on Senior Salaries, instead announcing that most senior staff will see a pay rise of 1.5%.
  • The armed forces have received the recommended pay award of 2.8% from 1 April 2009, including the senior military officers who fall under the remit of the Review Body on Senior Salaries, the only group within its remit to do so.
  • Police officers agreed a three-year pay award from 1 September 2008, which increased pay by 2.65% in the first year.
  • The pay of MPs, which is based on the increases paid to several public sector groups, increased by 2.33% from 1 April 2009.

The economic background for this year's public sector pay review bodies' reports has been more complicated than in recent years. While several of the groups covered by the review bodies, including teachers and NHS workers, agreed long-term pay deals in 2008, those that did not have seen a rapid deterioration in the economy and the labour market while the review bodies were collecting and considering evidence on their pay awards for 2009.

As the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB) said in its introduction: "This year we are faced with unusually volatile and uncertain conditions." It went on to describe the Government's evidence to the pay review bodies, stating that: "It stressed that the twin effects of the credit crunch and the rapid rise in food and energy prices had hit the economy and argued that, while the UK had strong economic foundations, decisions in the next year would be critical in determining how well the economy responded. The Government noted the latest forecasts for negative economic growth and falling consumer prices index (CPI) inflation in 2009. It stressed the importance of managing wage expectations in the public sector as well as the rest of the economy."

The review bodies' evidence from the Government emphasised the "total reward" of working in the public sector, highlighting the value of the pensions and factors such as work-life balance. It also suggested that the weakening labour market would make the public sector relatively more attractive as an employer and assist with recruitment and retention.

The 2009 Budget confirmed that in setting public sector pay the Government would continue to balance: the objectives of recruiting and retaining a high-quality workforce; affordability and value for money; and consistency with achieving the Bank of England's inflation target (CPI inflation of 2%). It emphasised the importance of pay restraint, particularly for senior staff who, it said, have an "important role to play in showing leadership".

On 31 March, the Government announced the publication of the reports of the AFPRB and the Review Body on Senior Salaries, whose findings are examined below (see table 1 for a summary). The Review Body on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration was published on the same date and will be covered in the forthcoming second part of this feature.

Police officers agree three-year deal

The pay of police officers in the UK is negotiated by the Police Negotiating Board (PNB). The PNB was unable to reach agreement on a pay award for 2008, and the matter was referred to the Police Arbitration Tribunal for the third successive year. The tribunal hearing was scheduled for October 2008. However, as a result of the PNB's failure to agree a pay deal, in September 2008 Home Secretary Jacqui Smith launched a consultation on proposals to introduce a pay review body to replace the PNB, a move that was opposed by police officers.

The two sides of the PNB continued to hold talks "out of committee", and in October Smith announced that a three-year pay deal had been agreed and that consultation on a pay review body had therefore ended. The Government made a commitment not to take steps to introduce a review body during the current Parliament.

The three-year deal increases salaries of police officers by 2.65% from 1 September 2008 (see table 2), by 2.6% from 1 September 2009 and by 2.55% from 1 September 2010. The London weighting is increased by the same percentage from 1 July of each year, making it worth £2,163 per annum from 1 July 2008 and £2,220 per annum from 1 July 2009.

The deal includes a reopening mechanism "if at 31 August 2009, or 31 August 2010, either side of the PNB produces new evidence of a substantial and material change in wider economic and labour market conditions and a significant material change to police officer recruitment and retention over the previous 12-month period, then both sides will enter into discussions relating to the pay award due the 1 September immediately following".

The award brings the salary of a police constable after initial training to £24,675 per year.

Armed forces

The AFPRB makes recommendations on the pay of members of the armed forces up to and including the rank of brigadier and equivalent. The pay of senior officers in the armed forces is under the remit of the Review Body on Senior Salaries.

The 38th AFPRB report was published on 31 March 2009. The AFPRB recommended an increase of 2.8% to the salaries of service personnel from 1 April 2009 (see table 3), with specialist pay and compensatory allowances uplifted by the same percentage. It also recommended a range of "targeted financial measures" to support recruitment and retention. Its recommendations were accepted in full by the Government.

The AFPRB said that the armed forces faced significant recruitment and retention challenges and a "persistent" staffing deficit. At 1 October 2008, full-time trained strength was 173,270 against a requirement of 179,060 - a deficit of 3.2% - with manning balance not expected until 2010/11. The review body described the armed forces as "severely stretched" and said: "The manning deficit affects the armed forces' ability to deliver operational capability".

It also found that across most ranks, pay comparability with civilian workers had been maintained, but the armed forces attitude survey revealed that "pay is becoming a source of dissatisfaction and increasingly a significant retention-negative factor".

In making its recommendation on pay, the review body said: "We conclude from the evidence that a pay recommendation of 2.8% is required to support armed forces' recruitment, retention, morale and motivation and to signal that personnel are valued. This recommendation is, in our judgment, consistent with the Government's public sector pay policy, reflects prevailing labour market conditions and is affordable. Our recommendation on base pay forms part of our wider agenda to deliver a balanced package including targeted measures and charges."

Bonuses and allowances

In addition to its recommendation on an increase in base pay, the review body considered a range of targeted pay measures. One of these is the new commitment bonus announced by the Ministry of Defence in 2008 (external website), which came into effect in April 2009. The review body endorsed the new bonus scheme, which aims to extend the length of service and help the armed forces achieve the desired manning levels. The new commitment bonuses will be available to new entrants and those with up to four years' service. The Government also proposed transition arrangements for the current bonus scheme for those with between four and eight years' service, which the review body endorsed.

The AFPRB also undertook its first review of the longer separation allowance since it was introduced in 2005. This allowance compensates personnel for the periods they spend on deployment. Because of the current high level of operational commitments, periods of separation have become prolonged and more frequent, and this was reported to be damaging retention. The review body therefore recommended that the qualifying period for each level of longer separation allowance should be reduced from 300 days to 240 days from 1 April 2009.

Other measures were targeted at the pay of specific groups - such as service nurses and service divers - or at the minimum level of pay increase on promotion where particular difficulties have been identified.

Overall, the review body estimated that its recommendations would add 3.4% to the armed forces paybill.

Review Body on Senior Salaries

The Review Body on Senior Salaries (SSRB) makes recommendations on the pay of the senior civil service, senior military personnel, the judiciary and very senior managers in the NHS in England.

As it has in previous years, the SSRB noted that the people covered by its remit are "critically important to society" and said that its message to the Government was that it should value the commitment and loyalty of the remit group and not take advantage of it. However, it stated: "Now is not the time for radical changes to the levels of reward and we have therefore adopted a 'holding' position for this year." It described the recommended changes to salary levels as "modest".

In a written statement on the publication of the review body's report on 31 March 2009, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said: "The Government have decided to accept some, but not all of its recommendations. It is important in the present economic climate that senior staff in the public sector show leadership in the exercise of pay restraint."

Senior civil service

The review body makes recommendations on the pay of 4,212 members of the senior civil service (SCS). Staff below the level of permanent secretary are divided into three main pay bands. The 40 permanent secretaries have a separate pay range.

Second year of three-year settlement for senior civil service

In its 2008 report, the review body accepted the Government's proposal for a three-year settlement for the SCS, worth 7% of paybill over the period between 2008 and 2011. It recommended an average increase of 2.5% in the first year, made up of 1.5% new money and 1% recyclables (the savings made when higher-paid staff leave and are replaced by people on lower salaries).

For 2009/10, the review body recommended that base pay should increase by an average of 2.1%, plus an additional 0.8% recycling savings, with individual increases ranging from nil to 9%. It also recommended an increase of 2.1% to the minima and maxima of the three pay bands (rounded to the nearest £100). It accepted the Government's proposal that there should be no increase in the proportion of paybill for the non-consolidated payments, with the pot remaining at 8.6%.

The increases to pay bands and base pay for permanent secretaries are kept broadly in line with those for the SCS. The review body recommended that their base pay should also increase by an average of 2.1%, plus 0.8% recycling savings, with the range of increases between nil and 9%. It recommended an increase of 2.1% to the pay range minimum and maximum (rounded to the nearest £100), with the proportion of paybill available for non-consolidated payments for 2009/10 remaining at 8.6%.

Government response

In his written response to the review body's recommendations, Brown noted the recommendation for a 2.1% increase in base pay but stated: "The Government have decided that base pay and the minima and maxima of each pay band will increase by 1.5%. They have accepted the recommendation of no increase to the size of the non-consolidated performance-related pay pot. Permanent secretaries have already announced that they will forgo such payments in 2009."

The resulting pay band minima and ceilings from 1 April 2009 are shown in table 4.

Union reaction

The senior public servants' union, the FDA, condemned the Government's decision. Jonathan Baume, FDA general secretary, said: "Last year the Government agreed a settlement for senior civil servants worth 7% over three years, and we are seeking assurances that ministers are not intending to renege on this deal.

"Scoring cheap political points by failing to honour the recommended pay rises will only further exacerbate the problems highlighted repeatedly, including by the Cabinet Office, which show that senior private sector staff are paid up to 114% more than their equivalents in the civil service."

Reforming senior civil service reward

The pay and performance management system for the SCS has been of increasing concern for the review body, and the SSRB report stated that members of the SCS are very unhappy with it. It noted that the structure of the system "may encourage individuals to compete rather than cooperate".

It therefore welcomed the Normington report on SCS workforce and reward strategy (on the civil service website), although it did express reservations about some aspects of the report and put forward its own views on workforce and reward strategies. The review body reiterated its opinion that a new reward strategy was urgently needed, saying that pay systems send out powerful signals about an organisation's priorities and, if badly designed, can have a negative effect on the motivation of employees. The Normington report stated that it anticipated that a new reward model could be implemented at the end of the current pay round in April 2011.

Civil service retirement and severance terms

At the same time as the publication of the SSRB report was announced, Brown said that the Government intended to fundamentally reform the severance and early retirement terms for all civil servants to control costs. The civil service unions have been involved in talks with the Cabinet Office about the Civil Service Compensation Scheme (on the Personnel Today wesite), and the unions expressed surprise at the announcement being made while discussions were ongoing.

Senior officers in the armed forces

The SSRB's remit group for military personnel comprises 130 officers at two-star level and above (as of July 2008).

The review body proposed that all the ranks in its remit group should receive the same percentage increase in pay so the relativities between pay bands could be maintained. To ensure that its goal of a 10% pay increase on promotion to two-star level could be achieved by 2010/11, the review body took into account the 2.8% pay increase recommended by the AFPRB for the group of one-star officers from which these promotions will be made, and recommended the same 2.8% increase to base pay for its remit group from 1 April 2009.

Brown said the Government had decided to accept the SSRB's recommendations on senior military pay - the only one of the SSRB's remit groups to receive the recommended award.

X-factor

The Government accepted the SSRB's recommendation in 2008 to extend the X-factor to two- and three-star officers (the X-factor is the adjustment to military pay that recognises the disadvantage of conditions of service experienced by members of the armed forces compared to those in the civilian sector). This was to be phased in over three years up to the recommended level of 25% of the value of the X-factor at the top of the OF-4 (lieutenant colonel) pay scale. The first stage of this paid 15% of the value from 1 April 2008, with the payment to increase to 20% of the value from 2009 and 25% from 2010. The SSRB recommended that the full 25% be paid from 1 April 2009, a year earlier than originally proposed, because phasing-in the increase had the unintended consequence of temporarily reducing the pay differential between one-star and two-star officers. It said the cost of doing this would be "minimal".

The Government accepted this recommendation, and the resulting salary scales are shown in table 5.

Job evaluation

In 2008, the MoD commissioned a job evaluation exercise to compare the remuneration of senior military jobs with similar roles in the private and wider public sector. Initial results indicate that the total remuneration of two- and three-star officers is significantly less than that offered in the private sector, and there is significant variation in the job weight among four-star posts. The full conclusions will be provided in the MoD's evidence for the 2010 SSRB report.

Judiciary

The SSRB has 2,151 salaried members of the judiciary in its remit group (as of 1 April 2008), divided into nine salary groups. Members of the judiciary are paid a spot rate with no element of performance-related pay and limited opportunity for career progression. The SSRB carries out periodic major reviews of the judicial pay system, and said it expects to start work on the next review during 2009 and publish the results in its 2011 report.

The Ministry of Justice proposed an increase of 2% for the whole judicial structure from 1 April 2009, arguing that a higher increase was not necessary as there were no problems with recruitment. It also argued that increases above this level would be difficult to fund because of "the limited resource budget provision for 2009/10". The SSRB said that it would be wrong in principle to treat pay as the residual of what can be afforded after all other claims on the budget have been met. It continued: "Planning for the judicial workforce ought to be one of the highest priorities in setting the budget for the courts services." Also, the review body heard evidence from the Lord Chief Justice that the morale of the judiciary would not be improved by the proposed 2% increase, having already been damaged by a staged pay award in 2007 and a delayed award in 2008.

The SSRB said that it would normally recommend a slightly higher increase for those in its judicial remit group, to achieve an average for staff in post in the group that is closer to the average increase received by those in its other remit groups when pay progression is taken into account. It said it was not persuaded by the Government's argument that 2% is the maximum that could, or should, be afforded for the judiciary, and therefore recommended an increase of 2.6% for almost all salary groups.

However, Brown announced that the Government had decided that judicial salaries would increase by 1.5% (see table 6).

"Very senior managers" in the NHS

The very senior managers (VSM) in the NHS in England were brought into the remit of the SSRB in 2007, so this is the second year for which the review body has made recommendations on the 1,120 managers paid under the VSM pay framework. These are chief executives, executive directors (other than medical directors) and board-level directors reporting to the chief executive in strategic health authorities, special health authorities, primary care trusts and ambulance trusts.

The pay of VSMs is determined by the band in which their organisation is placed, which depends on different weighting factors for each type of organisation.

Pay awards for these managers are made up of two elements - an annual pay uplift and a non-consolidated bonus payment - which are based on the performance category in which they are placed as follows:

  • those that fall into category D (not satisfactory) receive no increase. If an organisation does not meet its financial control targets, all its VSMs are treated as category D performers;
  • category C (satisfactory) performers receive the annual uplift consolidated into salary; and
  • category B (exceeds expectations) and category A (outstanding) receive the consolidated annual uplift and a non-consolidated bonus.

2009 pay award

The Department of Health (DH) argued that VSMs should be treated in the same way as other directly employed staff groups such as consultants and junior doctors, for whom it had proposed a 2% uplift, and therefore proposed a pay award of 2%, made up of a 1.5% uplift in base pay and an increase of 0.5% to the bonus pot. The managers' trade union Managers in Partnership (MiP) argued that very senior managers should receive the same increase as those staff on Agenda for Change (AfC) pay rates.

The SSRB said that the recommended increase that had been accepted for 2008 was lower than the increase applied to AfC rates, and expressed the view that any increase to the pay of VSMs below the AfC increase of 2.4% for 2009 would aggravate the problem of pay differentials between these groups. The review body therefore recommended an increase of 2.4% for this group.

Government response

Brown said that the base pay of VSMs in the NHS would be increased by 1.5%. The pay bands for chief executives are shown in table 7.

MiP reacted to the Government's announcement on pay saying it was "disappointed but not surprised by the Government's decision to impose a 1.5% pay award and ignore an independent body's recommendation for 2.4%".

Review of the pay framework for senior NHS managers

In 2008, the DH commissioned a review of the pay arrangements for VSMs, and included the review's findings, and its response to them, in its evidence for the current SSRB report. The DH is addressing the issues arising from the review, but told the SSRB that it did not expect that the new arrangements would be in place before 2010. The SSRB has requested regular reports on how the work programme is progressing.

The SSRB's report made several recommendations based on the review of the pay framework.

The review recommended that "if it is to continue in the medium to long term", the pay framework should be based on job evaluation, away from the current system based on weighting factors. The SSRB welcomed this suggestion, which was accepted in principle by the DH, and urged the DH to make job evaluation a priority, and to keep the SSRB updated on its progress.

The review considered the question of the financial control target in determining pay awards, and recommended that it be kept in place only for performance pay, not for the base salary uplift. The SSRB supported this and recommended that the remuneration committee should have the discretion to award an annual uplift for individuals whose performance merits it, and that the automatic application of the D rating for organisations failing to meet financial targets should cease.

According to a DH spokesperson, this recommendation has not been accepted: "Following detailed discussion across Government, it has been decided that this provision of the very senior NHS managers' pay framework is to remain in place. In the present economic circumstances, it is essential that all NHS organisations operate the highest levels of financial control, and this provision works to that end."

The review concluded that remuneration committees should be given the main responsibility to decide on performance pay allocations, which the SSRB supported, and made the recommendation that they be given greater autonomous power as soon as practicable.

On this recommendation, the DH spokesperson said: "The Government accepts that remuneration committees operating the very senior NHS managers' pay framework should have clarity about the freedoms available to them under the framework, and about the proper scope of the roles of the 'grandparent' organisations which approve their decisions. New guidance for remuneration committees is presently being prepared by the DH, following a wide process of consultation across the NHS. The DH aims to issue this guidance before the summer."

The SSRB welcomed the review's recommendation that there should be greater flexibility in allocating individual awards and increased transparency over the purpose of the bonus pot. The SSRB thought that these recommendations would need time to "bed in", so it recommended that the bonus pot remains at 5% of paybill for 2009/10. In his statement, Brown said the Government accepted this recommendation.

Members of Parliament

In July 2008, the link between the pay increases awarded to the SCS and the pay of MPs was broken, with MPs' pay rises instead being based on the median of the increases received in the previous year by 15 groups of public sector workers.

The 2009 pay increase for MPs was calculated by the SSRB, and communicated in a letter to the Speaker of the House of Commons. It was based on 12 settlements, because two groups had not finalised their award by the end of 2008, and for a further group the SSRB was unable to identify a single increase in pay scales. The calculation arrived at an increase of 2.33% to be applied to the salaries of members of the House of Commons with effect from 1 April 2009. This brings the salary for an MP to £64,766.

Ministerial pay

Ministerial pay increases are still automatically linked to the increases awarded to the SCS, so Brown announced that this would yield an increase of 1.5% on ministerial pay. He said: "However, given the importance of public sector pay restraint at a time of economic uncertainty, salaried ministers will not be accepting any pay rise in 2009/10, either in their ministerial pay or in their parliamentary pay."

This feature was written by Rachel Sharp, researcher/writer, Pay and Benefits Bulletin.

Table 1: Summary of pay review body awards covered in this feature

Group (nos. covered)

2009 pay award

Previous increase

Armed forces (191,510)

2.8% increase in basic pay and allowances from 1 April 2009.

2.6% increase in basic pay and allowances.

MPs (646)

2.33% pay increase from 1 April 2009.

2.38% pay increase from 1 April 2008.

Police officers (165,247)

Second year of three-year pay award: increase of 2.6% due from 1 September 2009.

First year of three-year pay award: salaries increased by 2.65% from 1 September 2008.

Review Body on Senior Salaries - judiciary (2,151)

1.5% increase to judicial salaries from 1 April 2009.

Increases averaging slightly over 2.5% for almost all groups from 1 April 2008.

Review Body on Senior Salaries - senior civil service (4,212)

From 1 April 2009, the minimum and maximum of each pay band will increase by 1.5%. Base pay will increase by 2.3% on average (made up of 1.5% new money and 0.8% recyclables). The bonus pot remains at 8.6% of paybill.

From 1 April 2008, basic pay increase averaging 2.5% and an increase in the bonus pot to 8.6% of paybill. This is the first year of a three-year period (2008 to 2011) covered by an "indicative envelope" of 7% increase to the senior civil service paybill, plus recyclables. Increase of approximately 2% to minima of bands 1 and 1A.

Review Body on Senior Salaries - senior military (130)

2.8% increase to base pay, and X-factor for two- and three-star officers at 25% of the value at the top of the OF-4 scale from 1 April 2009, rather than being phased in.

2.2% increase to pay scales, plus restructuring of two-star pay scale over three years, to ensure at least a 10% increase in basic pay on promotion to this rank, and restructuring of three- and four-star scales to maintain differentials. X-factor extended to two- and three-star officers at increasing levels over three years.

Review Body on Senior Salaries - very senior managers in the NHS (1,120)

From 1 April 2009, 1.5% performance-related increase in base pay. Bonus pot remains at 5% of paybill.

Performance-related base pay increased by 2.2%, effective from 1 April 2008. No change in bonus pot.

Table 2: Police pay ranges, 1 September 2008

Rank

£pa

Constable - starting salary

22,104

Constable - on completion of initial training

24,675

Constable - main pay scale

26,1091 to 34,7072

Sergeant

34,707 to 39,0062

Inspector

44,469 to 48,2342
(46,419 to 50,1992 in London)

Chief inspector3

49,221 to 51,2462
(51,183 to 53,2052 in London)

Superindendent4

59,211 to 68,985

Chief superintendent

70,704 to 74,736

1. Officers move to this salary point on completion of two years' service as a constable.

2. Officers who have been on this point for a year will have access to the competence-related threshold payment of £1,152 per year.

3. For those appointed to post after 31 August 1994. Chief inspectors appointed prior to this date are paid a basic annual salary of £52,0862 (£54,0362 in London).

4. A new pay scale covering superintendent and chief superintendent was introduced from 1 January 2002. Superintendents paid on what was known as range 2, but not promoted to chief superintendent, received pay protection from that date. Their pay range is £67,794 to £72,147.

Table 3: Armed forces pay examples, 1 April 20091

Rank2

Min, £pa

Max, £pa

New recruits

13,377

-

OTHER RANKS

Private and lance corporal

16,681

28,372

Corporal

25,887

32,532

Sergeant

29,424

36,205

Warrant officer II

32,572

42,404

Warrant officer I

37,843

45,836

OFFICERS UP TO AND INCLUDING BRIGADIER

Lieutenant

15,268

32,062

Captain

37,172

44,206

Major

46,824

56,078

Lieutenant Colonel

65,717

76,095

Colonel

79,716

87,655

Brigadier

95,128

98,984

1. Including the X-factor - an element of pay designed to take into account the relative disadvantage of conditions of service experienced by members of the armed forces compared with civilians.

2. Rank shown for army personnel, but applies to equivalent ranks in the air force and navy.

Table 4: Senior civil service pay band values, 1 April 2009

Pay band

Min, £pa

Ceiling, £pa

1 (Deputy director)

58,200

117,800

1A (Deputy director)

67,600

128,900

2 (Director)

82,900

162,500

3 (Director general)

101,500

208,100

Permanent secretary

141,800

277,300

Source: Cabinet Office.

Table 5: Senior military officer pay scales, 2009 and 2010

Pay scale point

Two-star officer, £pa1

Three-star officer, £pa1

Four-star officer, £pa

Chief of defence staff, £pa

PAY SCALES FROM 1.4.09

7

117,065

-

-

-

6

114,655

151,609

179,084

-

5

112,244

146,821

175,571

-

4

109,831

142,030

172,130

247,427

3

107,420

137,243

168,754

242,576

2

105,400

129,669

165,445

237,819

1

103,873

122,095

162,212

233,157

PAY SCALES FROM 1.4.102

7

119,167

-

-

-

6

116,877

152,595

185,184

-

5

114,631

148,218

181,553

-

4

112,429

143,969

177,993

252,698

3

110,270

138,522

173,652

247,743

2

108,154

132,037

169,416

242,885

1

106,079

125,861

165,284

238,123

1. Pay scales include X-factor at the rate of £2,336, equivalent to 25% of the cash value of the X-factor at the top of the OF-4 pay scale.
2. These are the revalorised rates for the final year of the restructuring programme, and will be further revalorised in line with the recommended award for 2010/11.

Table 6: Judicial salaries, 1 April 09

Group

Job examples

Salary, £pa

1

Lord Chief Justice

239,845

1.1

Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland; Lord President of the Court of Session; Master of the Rolls; Senior Lord of Appeal in Ordinary

214,165

2

Lords of Appeal in Ordinary; Lord Justice Clerk; President of the Family Division; Chancellor of the High Court; President of the Queen's Bench Division

206,857

3

Inner House Judges of the Court of Session; Lords Justices of Appeal; Lords Justices of Appeal (Northern Ireland)

196,707

4

High Court Judges; Outer House Judges of the Court of Session; Puisne Judges (Northern Ireland)

172,753

5

Circuit Judges at the Central Criminal Court in London; President, Employment Tribunals (England and Wales); Senior Circuit Judges

138,548

6.1

Circuit Judges; Sheriffs; County Court Judges (Northern Ireland)

128,296

6.2

Deputy Senior District Judge (Magistrates' Courts)

120,785

7

Employment Judges; District Judges; Immigration Judges

102,921

Source: Ministry of Justice.

Table 7: Pay bands for chief executives in the NHS, 1 April 2009

Pay band

Primary care trust, £pa

Ambulance trust, £pa

Strategic health authority, £pa

Special health authority, salary range, £pa

1

105,315

112,764

161,091

Group 3: 99,829 to 141,861

2

116,401

121,355

171,831

Group 2: 141,861 to 162,878

3

127,486

128,873

182,570

Group 1: 162,878 to 183,894

4

138,571

-

-

-

5

149,657

-

-

-

London

-

150,351

204,048

-

Source: Department of Health.

Additional resources on XpertHR