44
Enclosure 5.
3.
The
I am
determine to a large extent the grade of accommodation supplied. figure is in any event higher than the present rent charged for quarters even in the case of a Chief Inspector on the maximum of the revised scale. The enclosed table shows more accurately the difference in total emoluments in 1941 and 1947 for a married officer with children. unable to accept the petitioners' contention that "the cost of living has increased at least 400% over 1941 prices". As you are aware, a Committee was recently appointed to review the temporary rates of cost of living allowance recommended by the Salaries Commission, and its findings are at present being studied. All officers in the Service had the opportunity to forward representations to this Committee.
The
Paragraph 10 The argument that officers must save against their leave, eventual retirement and their children's education applies to civil servants everywhere and appears to lend little support to the petitioners' case.
Paragraph 11. The argument contained in this paragraph is incorrect. rates of pay for all non-gazetted ranks in the Police Force except Inspectors and Chief Inspectors were altered in 1946. Below the rank of Inspector, Sergeants and Sub-Inspectors had their salaries on the existing scale adjusted upwards so that they received one increment above £260 for each year of Police or Military service over the age of 26. In addition the promotion bar between the grades of Sub-Inspector and Inspector was removed and Sub-Inspectors were allowed to go up to Inspector without waiting for a vacancy provided that they had served three years on the maximum of the Sub-Inspectors scale.
Paragraph 12 (b) Since the revised scale for Sub-Inspectors is shorter than the old scale, some arbitrary and artificial arrangements had to be made for conversion from the old scales to the new. This was done through- out all branches of the service by altering incremental dates on conversion and providing for what are in effect partial increments at appropriate points on the various scales. This method made it possible to place officers formerly on a longer scale at spaced intervals on a shorter scale and is one which has been adopted in other Colonies for salary revision purposes.
It is of course true that new entrants will reach the top of the revised scale somewhat quicker than was possible in the past. That is an inevitable result of a drastic revision of salaries and cannot be a serious cause of complaint.
•
Paragraph 13. The contention that one of the reasons for granting expatriation pay is to augment an officer's basic pay "to such extent that he can live in that social state and condition as his position warrants, and particularly having regard to his brother officers of equivalent rank who belong to races which have a more frugal manner of living" is unwarranted.
It was certainly not the Salaries Commission's intention. There is an apparent confusion in the minds of the petitioners between expatriation pay and cost of living allowance There is no reason why a local Sub-Inspector should not have the same social position and standard of living as an expatriate Sub-Inspector. If he is to do his job efficiently, and play his proper part in the community, his social status should be no less than that of his expatriate colleagues. The evidence which the Salaries Commission received was that it would cost a local officer in present circumstances at least as much to live at any given common standard of living as an expatriate officer.
Paragraph 14. The adequacy of the total emoluments of officers on the revised scales of pay and allowances has recently been under consideration by the Committee appointed to review the present high cost of living allowances and until the Committee's report has been further studied, I prefer not to comment on the petitioners' contention that their total
emoluments/