Top civil servants told it is better to give than receive
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.SIR ROBIN BUTLER, the pounds 105,000-a-year head of the Home Civil Service, has dropped a heavy hint that fellow Whitehall mandarins might care to give some of their 3 per cent pay rise next April to charity, writes Barrie Clement.
Embarrassed that the rise would breach the 1.5 per cent limit imposed on 5 million lesser mortals throughout the public sector, Sir Robin counsels senior colleagues in an internal memorandum that a discreet donation to people less fortunate than themselves might be in order. In a letter to the top three grades, earning between pounds 49,300 and pounds 84,250 a year, Sir Robin says the most senior of them 'will choose either not to draw some or all of the 3 per cent increase due in April 1, 1994 or will contribute it to good causes'. He declines to say what he will do with his pounds 3,000 increase.
He said there was 'a particular problem for those in charge of departments who will be asking their staff to accept a policy which will inevitably bear heavily on them'. While he makes it clear that it will be a 'personal and private decision in each case', many permanent secretaries will fall into line, he indicates.
The source of Sir Robin's embarrassment is a staged three-year pay award earlier this year, some of which is due in April. The Chancellor's Autumn Statement, which introduced the salary restraint, failed to take into account the kind of deal awarded earlier in the year to the most senior staff.
Jenny Thurston, deputy general secretary of the IPMS union for senior specialist officials, said the memo put pressure on civil servants to accept an alteration of their contracts, and as such raised fundamental ethical questions. 'While we oppose the imposition of the 1.5 per cent ceiling, perhaps it would have made more sense to ask senior staff to accept the same restraint.'
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments