Public sector pay review bodies (3): senior salaries
This feature looks at the recommendations of the Review Body on Senior Salaries and at parliamentary pay, as well as the Armed Forces' Pay Review Body supplementary report on the defence medical services.
On this page:
Background
Senior civil service
Multi-year agreement
Senior civil service pay for 2008/09
Government response
Armed forces
Senior medical and dental officers
Judiciary
Very senior managers in the NHS
Pay framework for "very senior managers"
Pensions
Parliamentary pay
Defence medical services
Table 1: Summary of pay
awards covered in this feature
Table 2: Senior civil service pay band values, 1.4.08
Table 3: Senior military officer pay
scales, 2008 to 2011
Table 4:
Senior medical and dental officer pay rates, 1.4.08
Table 5: Judicial salaries, 1.4.08
Table 6: Pay bands for chief executives in
the NHS, 1.4.08
Table 7: Defence
medical services salaries, 1.4.08
Additional resources on XpertHR
|
Key points
|
The Review Body on Senior Salaries (SSRB) provides independent advice to the government on the pay of the judiciary, senior civil servants, senior officers of the armed forces and, for the first time this year, the group of "very senior managers" in the NHS in England. It also reviews parliamentary pay, pensions and allowances every three years.
The SSRB’s 30th report on senior salaries (PDF format, 610K) (external website) was published on 17 June 2008, several months later than had been expected, and after the review date for the pay of its remit groups. The SSRB explains in its introduction that the delay was caused by a request from the government in February 2008 for the review body to consider a recommendation covering a three-year period for the senior civil service (SCS).
Announcing the publication of the report (external website), the government said it accepted all the main recommendations of the review body and would implement them with effect from 1 April 2008. The SSRB’s recommendations for each of its remit groups are summarised below, and in table 1.
Background
As was the case with other review body recommendations last year, the government decided to stage the awards for most of the SSRB’s remit groups in 2007. The SSRB expressed disappointment with this and noted there was evidence that the staging of its "modest" pay awards had damaged morale. It also said that if this happened regularly, it would undermine the system of independent pay review bodies.
The terms of reference of the SSRB require it to consider factors including the need to recruit and retain suitably qualified people and balance these against the government’s departmental expenditure limits and inflation target. Along with the other pay review bodies, the SSRB had been advised in written evidence from the Treasury that public sector pay awards should be consistent with the government’s inflation target of 2%, as measured using the consumer prices index.
In a forthright introduction to the report, the SSRB said it wanted to draw attention to its serious concerns about the motivation and morale of its remit groups, which it believed were suffering at least partly as a result of pay. Describing the groups it covers as "the leaders of several of the pillars on which British society is built", it said it was becoming increasingly concerned that the groups did not perceive their reward systems and pay to be fair, and felt they were not getting the recognition and respect they deserve.
The SSRB added that the remuneration of most of its remit groups had fallen far behind that of their counterparts in the private sector, as well as other parts of the public sector. It took the view that the pay of its remit group of fewer than 8,000 people "can have no direct impact on inflation" and that the modest adjustments required to get remuneration right are "trivial in any consideration of inflation or public expenditure". These adjustments could, it claimed, "be fundamental to securing and sustaining high-quality public services".
It concluded: "We are increasingly concerned that mechanistically applied public expenditure controls are threatening to undermine the commitment and motivation of our remit groups and the ability to recruit and retain people of sufficient quality. The government is again applying a public sector pay policy which has the effect of limiting earnings increases to well below both the private sector rate and the RPI [retail prices index].
"It argues in effect that the public expenditure constraints are now even tighter than in recent years and in the light of the three-year comprehensive spending review we expect the trend to continue. Our recommendations in the following chapters reflect our view of the balance of all the factors we are required to consider. However, we cannot offer full solutions to the problems if our remit groups remain restricted to overall increases of the order of 2%."
Senior civil service
The SSRB remit group covers all members of the senior civil service (SCS) (4,075 in post in 2007). The SCS uses three main pay bands - bands 1, 2 and 3 - with some departments also using an intermediate band 1A. Permanent secretaries, of which there were 40 in 2007, have a separate pay range.
The pay progression of senior civil servants is entirely performance based, and comprises increases to basic pay along with bonus payments.
In its previous report, the SSRB expressed the view that the government should review the functioning of the pay and performance system for the SCS. It welcomed the news that the government had commissioned a review, led by Sir David Normington, permanent secretary at the Home Office, to "provide long-term direction to the SCS workforce and reward strategy". However, it noted its concern that the review was to be completed in a short time (with its findings to be included in evidence to the SSRB in autumn 2008). Among the points it raised for the review to consider was the "unacceptable practice" of external candidates being able to negotiate starting salaries above the advertised rates, while existing civil servants would be paid a lower rate than advertised.
Multi-year agreement
Although the SSRB had reservations about the government’s proposal for a three-year settlement for the SCS, it said it was prepared to recommend such an arrangement provided that it could re-examine the position each year. It therefore recommended an "indicative envelope" of 7% for the SCS paybill for the period 2008 to 2011 to be used for "normal base pay increases" and increases to the bonus pot. In addition, it said that recyclables (the savings made by replacing high-paid civil servants who leave with lower-paid staff) estimated to be worth 1% a year would be available. The SSRB recommended that the bonus pot should be increased to 10% of paybill from the 2007 rate of 7.6% over this period.
In addition, the SSRB said it believed the costs of implementing the outcome of the Normington review should be funded by additional money.
Senior civil service pay for 2008/09
The SSRB then considered its recommendations for 2008/09. It suggested increasing the minima for pay bands 1 and 1A (the two lowest bands) by 2.1% and 2% respectively, to help maintain pay differentials with the rest of the civil service (see table 2). It said that the basic pay of senior civil servants should rise by an average of 2.5%, made up of 1.5% new money and 1% recyclables. The SSRB recommended a range for individual rises of between nil and 9%, based on performance. It suggested an increase of 1% to the bonus pot for 2008/09 (an increase of 0.8% on paybill as bonuses are not pensionable).
The SSRB said it believed that the progression target rates (the effective maximum pay rate for most civil servants) for bands 1 and 1A should be retained until it has been able to examine the recommendations of the Normington review, and that these rates should be raised by the same cash amount as the increase to the minimum for each band.
For permanent secretaries, the SSRB recommended that the pay range should not be increased this year. It recommended a range of individual increases for this group of between nil and 9%, together with an rise in the bonus pot to 8.6% of paybill.
The SSRB calculated that its proposals for 2008/09 would account for 2.3% of the 7% envelope.
Government response
The SSRB recommended that the indicative envelope for SCS increases should be on the overall paybill, rather than paybill per head as proposed by the government. However, in its response, the government said it believed the appropriate metric was paybill per head and accepted the recommendation on this basis. It argued that this would keep individual awards consistent with public sector pay policy in the event of changes in workforce size.
With regard to the progression target rates for bands 1 and 1A, the government said it would replace these with "reference points", which it said would serve a similar purpose but would not limit pay increases for staff.
Armed forces
The SSRB’s remit group consists of 137 senior officers at two-star level and above (as at July 2007).
The SSRB recommended an increase of 2.2% to basic pay from 1 April 2008. It identified a problem with retention of officers at senior level in the armed forces, particularly at two-star level. To help address this, it recommended that the pay system should be restructured to ensure that officers receive an increase of at least 10% on promotion to two-star rank.
It suggested that the restructuring should be carried out over a three-year period and provided recommended pay scales for the period 2008 to 2011 (see table 3). This will require changes to three- and four-star pay ranges to maintain differentials.
The SSRB also endorsed Ministry of Defence proposals for the pay of the chief of defence staff to increase over the period 2008 to 2011, to keep it broadly in line with that of the cabinet secretary and Lord Chief Justice.
The SSRB also said that the X-factor (an element of pay that recognises the disadvantage of conditions of service experienced by members of the armed forces compared with civilians) should be extended to two- and three-star officers. This would reflect their increasing operational involvement.
The Armed Forces' Pay Review Body recommended in its 2008 report that the X-factor should be increased and that its taper should be changed so it covered higher ranks. The SSRB said the X-factor was now appropriate for officers in its remit group, and recommended that two- and three-star officers should receive 15% of the cash value of the X-factor paid at the top of the OF-4 scale (lieutenant colonel) in 2008/09, 20% in 2009/10 and 25% from 2010/11. This is worth £1,364 in 2008/09. The sums for 2009/10 and 2010/11 will be subject to any changes to the OF-4 scale, but are currently worth £1,818 in 2009/10 and £2,273 in 2010/11.
Senior medical and dental officers
The senior medical and dental officers group, comprising five two-star officers and one three-star officer, is paid more than other officers of the same rank, as their pay is kept in line with medical counterparts outside the armed forces. For senior medical and dental officers, the SSRB recommended that the 5% pay differential between the spot rate for two-star officers and the top of the one-star scale should be maintained, as should the 5% differential between the three-star rate and the two-star rate (see table 4).
The SSRB also recommended that the X-factor should be extended to two- and three-star medical and dental officers, at the level of 15% of the cash value at increment level 22 of the consultant pay scale (see Defence medical services below) in 2008/09, 20% in 2009/10 and 25% from 2010/11. In 2008/09, this is worth £2,242.
Judiciary
There are 2,151 salaried members of the judiciary in the SSRB remit group (as at April 2007) in 70 categories of post. For pay purposes, these are divided into nine salary groups, each of which is paid a spot rate.
In the past, the SSRB has carried out a major review of the judicial pay system every four or five years. The last such review was carried out in 2006, and the SSRB is starting to plan the next review. It has asked the administrations in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to collect data on the "job weight" in the judiciary to enable it to assess if the job weight at lower levels is increasing. It also asked the judicial appointment organisations to collect data on the earnings of candidates for judicial office to assess if pay is adequate to recruit and retain appropriate people.
The SSRB found no major problems with retention, although it said there may be concerns about recruitment in the future.
The SSRB noted that it shared the disappointment of the remit group at the decision to stage the pay award in 2007. It also said it was not persuaded that 2% was the most that could be afforded for the judiciary in 2008, and recommended increases averaging just over 2.5% (rounded to the nearest £100) for most of the groups (see table 5).
Very senior managers in the NHS
The "very senior managers" in the NHS were added to the remit of the SSRB in July 2007.
This is a group of 1,335 managers (as at December 2007) in around 180 NHS organisations in England. They are chief executives, executive directors (other than medical directors) and other senior managers with board-level responsibility who report directly to the chief executive in strategic health authorities, special health authorities, primary care trusts and ambulance trusts. The group does not cover equivalent senior managers in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland or managers in other trusts in England.
Pay framework for "very senior managers"
The pay for most of this group has been governed by a pay framework since 2006. Some members of the remit group, particularly in primary care trusts in London, are not covered by the framework, but remain on pre-framework contracts. The new framework levels are reported by NHS Employers to be causing recruitment problems in London.
The government decided that the move to a national framework meant that remuneration for this group should be considered in the same way as that of other senior staff in the public sector and should therefore be included in the SSRB terms of reference. The Department of Health (DH) said it did not wish to change the structure of the arrangements this year, and asked the SSRB to recommend on the level of annual uplift and the funds for the performance bonus scheme.
The introduction of the framework led to several anomalies, both within the remit group and when comparing the pay of these managers with that of staff at the top of the Agenda for Change pay scale or with senior staff in NHS trusts who are not covered by the framework.
The SSRB welcomed the fact that the DH is reviewing the pay arrangements for this group. It made recommendations about what the review should cover, including job evaluation and the position of those managers not covered by the framework. It also suggested a review of the bonus scheme and the differences in pay between similar organisations that arise as a result of banding.
Chief executives are paid according to the band into which their post falls, which depends on different weighting factors in each type of organisation. Those in special health authorities have a pay range for each group, while those in other organisations are paid the spot rate for their band. Executive directors in special health authorities are paid a percentage of the midpoint of the chief executive pay range for their group. Executive directors in other organisations are paid between 55% and 75% of their chief executive’s basic pay.
Annual increases and bonuses are based on performance, with those whose performance is not satisfactory receiving no increase, and those for very senior managers who are rated as outstanding receiving a consolidated annual uplift and a 7% non-consolidated bonus. Those whose performance exceeds expectations receive the uplift and a 3% bonus, while those rated satisfactory receive only the annual consolidated uplift.
As this is the first year for which the SSRB has made recommendations for this group, it described these as "holding" recommendations and said it expected to comment more extensively next year. It said it would not recommend an increase to the bonus pot this year, as it was not convinced the performance pay arrangements were meeting their objectives. The bonus pot therefore remains at 5% of paybill.
In the light of settlements elsewhere in the NHS, the SSRB recommended a 2.2% increase to the pay of the very senior managers, saying it was "not persuaded by the government’s argument on affordability". See table 6 for pay rates.
The DH has written to employers to say that executive staff who are not covered by the very senior managers' pay framework should receive increases to basic pay of no more than 2.2%.
Pensions
The SSRB commissioned a review of the pensions provisions (PDF format, 568K) (external website) for its remit groups (this was before the NHS senior managers were added to its remit). All these groups have defined-benefit pension schemes, although new entrants to the civil service now join a career-average scheme. The review found that, since pensions were last examined in 2003, the comparative value of the pensions of both the judiciary and the senior military had improved, and the value of the SCS scheme remained unchanged. The SSRB concluded that, on the whole, pension arrangements for its remit groups were better than, or on a par with, those of most senior employees in the private and public sectors.
Parliamentary pay
The SSRB conducts a review of parliamentary pay, allowances and pensions every three years. Its latest report (PDF format, 370K) (external website) was published in January 2008.
This report noted that the mechanism used for uprating the pay of MPs, ministers and other office-holders by reference to changes in the SCS pay structure was no longer working because the approach to SCS pay had changed. The report made recommendations on MPs' pay, including:
- an increase in basic annual pay to £61,820 backdated to 1 April 2007 (an additional 1.9% increase on top of the 0.66% increase reached by applying the old formula);
- a change to the annual uprating mechanism from 1 April 2008, using the average percentage increase in basic salary of the SCS, or of band 1 of the SCS; and
- increases of £650 a year for three years from April 2008 in addition to those produced by the new formula to move the pay of MPs closer to that of relevant public sector comparators.
In its response (external website) the government accepted the recommendation to increase MPs’ salaries, but proposed that this should be paid in stages, increasing by 0.84% to £61,181 from 1 April 2007, and by a further 1.06% to £61,820 from 1 November. This was in line with its approach to public sector pay and kept the overall value of the award to below 2% on an annualised basis.
The SSRB’s proposal that the differential between the salary of MPs and those of the prime minister, ministers and other office-holders should increase was also rejected by the government, which said their salaries should increase at the same rate.
The government also ended the link between MPs’ salaries and SCS pay with effect from 31 March 2008. Sir John Baker, the retiring chairman of the SSRB, was asked to undertake a review of members’ pay and identify a new, independent mechanism for determining it, in particular to remove the need for MPs to vote on their salary increases.
This review (external website) was published on 17 June 2008. Baker’s report put forward an uprating mechanism for MPs’ pay using the public sector average earnings index. Baker also recommended that the SSRB was the appropriate body to undertake reviews of parliamentary pay and said that such reviews should be carried out in the first year of each parliament. He endorsed the SSRB’s recommendation on the £650 catch-up payments and put forward his conclusions on the level of MPs' pay from April 2008 and beyond.
In response (external website), the government accepted that the SSRB was the appropriate body to review MPs’ pay. However, it rejected the additional payments of £650 and the proposed uprating mechanism. Instead, it preferred a mechanism of uprating based on the median of the settlements of "a wide basket of public sector workforces". This includes the SCS, judiciary, senior military, very senior NHS managers, doctors and dentists, nurses, the prison service, teachers, the armed forces, the police, local government, the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Defence, the Home Office and HM Revenue and Customs.
In the House of Commons on 3 July 2008, the government’s preferred uprating mechanism was accepted, and the additional payments rejected.
It was also announced that ministers would not accept a pay rise in 2008/09.
Defence medical services
The supplement to the 37th report of the Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body (AFPRB) (PDF format, 710K) (external website), covering service medical and dental officers, was published in May 2008. The remit group, as of April 2007, comprised 495 medical officers and 552 in training, and 238 dental officers and 16 in training.
The AFPRB reported that manning levels as at 1 April 2007 were still below requirement, and concluded that recruitment and retention were under pressure. It said it believed that a reform of pay and careers was overdue and work was required on new approaches to manning and attracting recruits. Areas with significant manning shortfalls include anaesthetists, where there is a 53% shortfall against requirement, and general surgeons, with a 50% shortfall.
The review body said it was guided by the recommendations of the Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration , and recommended an increase of 2.2% to the pay of all defence medical services medical and dental officers, except for general medical practitioners and general dental practitioners. For these groups, the AFPRB recommended a 3.7% increase to reflect the earnings gap with general medical practitioners in the NHS and the growing risks to retention.
As with the main review body group, the AFPRB recommended that the X-factor should increase to 14% of basic pay and that revised tapering should apply to increase the amount of X-factor paid at lieutenant colonel, colonel and brigadier and equivalent ranks.
It recommended that the full X-factor be paid up to and including level 22 for consultants, general medical practitioners, general dental practitioners and non-accredited medical officers. From level 23 for these groups, X-factor at 75% of the cash value for increment level 22 should be applied. For those on the OF-5 and OF-6 pay spines, the X-factor should be set at 75% and 50% respectively of the cash value for increment level 22 on the consultant pay scale. The salaries shown in table 7 include the X-factor.
Consultants' national clinical excellence and distinction awards were also increased by 2.2%, which is the same increase as was applied to the NHS awards by the Review Body on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration.
The AFPRB estimated that its recommendations would add £8.2 million to the defence.
This feature was written by Rachel Sharp, researcher/writer, Pay and Benefits Bulletin.
|
Table 1: Summary of pay awards covered in this feature | ||
|
Group (nos. covered) |
2008 pay award |
Previous increase |
|
Senior civil service (4,075) |
From 1 April 2008, basic pay increase averaging 2.5%, and a 1% increase to the bonus pot. 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. |
2% increase to minimum salary in each pay band. Average 2.6% increase to individual salaries within pay bands from 1 April 2007. Bonus pot increased by 1.1% to 7.6% of paybill from 1 November 2007. |
|
Senior military (137) |
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. Chief of defence staff pay scale adjusted to keep salary broadly in line with cabinet secretary and Lord Chief Justice. X-factor extended to two- and three-star officers at increasing levels over three years. |
Basic pay increased by 2% for all officers of two-star rank and above from 1 April 2007. |
|
Judiciary (2,151) |
Increases averaging slightly over 2.5% for almost all groups from 1 April 2008. |
Average increase in basic pay of 2.4%, paid in two stages: 1% from 1 April 2007 and the remainder from 1 November 2007. |
|
Very senior managers in the NHS (1,335) |
Pay rates increase by 2.2%. |
1.3% increase in basic pay rates from 1 April 2007. |
|
MPs (646) |
2.25% from 1 April 2008. |
Pay increase worth 1.9% over the year from 1 April 2007: 0.66% plus an additional 0.84% paid from 1 April 2007 and 1.06% from 1 November 2007. |
|
Medical and dental officers (1,301) |
2.2% for all defence medical services medical and dental officers, except general medical practitioners and general dental practitioners, who receive 3.7%, from 1 April 2008. Level of X-factor increased and taper changed. |
2% increase on salaries from 1 April 2007. |
|
Table 2: Senior civil service pay band values, 1.4.081 | ||
|
Pay band |
Minimum, £pa |
Ceiling, £pa |
|
1 (Deputy director) |
57,300 |
116,000 |
|
1A (Deputy director) |
66,600 |
127,000 |
|
2 (Director) |
81,600 |
160,000 |
|
3 (Director general) |
99,960 |
205,000 |
| Permanent secretary |
139,740 |
273,250 |
|
1. Basic pay increases to average 2.5% (made up of 1.5% new money and 1% recyclables). | ||
|
Table 3: Senior military officer pay scales, 2008 to 2011 | ||||
|
Pay scale point |
Two-star officer, £pa1 |
Three-star officer, £pa1 |
Four-star officer, £pa |
Chief of defence staff, £pa |
|
PAY SCALES FROM 1.4.08 | ||||
|
7 |
109,415 |
- |
- |
- |
|
6 |
107,117 |
142,359 |
170,791 |
- |
|
5 |
104,817 |
137,793 |
167,440 |
- |
|
4 |
102,517 |
133,225 |
164,159 |
235,969 |
|
3 |
100,217 |
128,659 |
160,939 |
231,342 |
|
2 |
98,291 |
121,436 |
157,784 |
226,805 |
|
1 |
96,835 |
114,213 |
154,700 |
222,359 |
|
PAY SCALES FROM 1.4.092 | ||||
|
7 |
111,604 |
- |
- |
- |
|
6 |
109,259 |
145,207 |
174,206 |
- |
|
5 |
106,914 |
140,549 |
170,789 |
- |
|
4 |
104,567 |
135,889 |
167,442 |
240,688 |
|
3 |
102,222 |
131,232 |
164,158 |
235,969 |
|
2 |
100,257 |
123,865 |
160,939 |
231,341 |
|
1 |
98,771 |
116,497 |
157,794 |
226,806 |
|
PAY SCALES FROM 1.4.102 | ||||
|
7 |
113,649 |
- |
- |
- |
|
6 |
111,421 |
146,166 |
180,140 |
- |
|
5 |
109,236 |
141,908 |
176,608 |
- |
|
4 |
107,094 |
137,775 |
173,145 |
245,815 |
|
3 |
104,994 |
132,476 |
168,922 |
240,995 |
|
2 |
102,936 |
126,168 |
164,802 |
236,269 |
|
1 |
100,917 |
120,160 |
160,782 |
231,637 |
|
1. In addition to basic pay, X-factor at
the rate of £1,364 will be paid in 2008/09, £1,818 in 2009/10 and £2,273
in 2010/11, the latter two being subject to uprating of the OF-4 pay
scale. | ||||
|
Table 4: Senior medical and dental officer pay rates, 1.4.081 | |
|
Rank |
Basic pay, £pa |
|
Three-star |
139,667 |
|
Two-star |
133,016 |
|
1. In addition to basic pay, X-factor at the rate of £2,242 will be paid in 2008/09. | |
|
Table 5: Judicial salaries, 1.4.08 | ||
|
Group |
Job examples |
Salary, £pa |
|
1 |
Lord Chief Justice |
236,300 |
|
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 |
211,000 |
|
2 |
Lords of Appeal in Ordinary; Lord Justice Clerk; President of the Family Division; The Chancellor of the High Court; President of the Queen's Bench Division |
203,800 |
|
3 |
Inner House Judges of the Court of Session; Lords Justices of Appeal; Lords Justices of Appeal (Northern Ireland) |
193,800 |
|
4 |
High Court Judges; Outer House Judges of the Court of Session; Puisne Judges (Northern Ireland) |
170,200 |
|
5 |
Circuit Judges at the Central Criminal Court in London; President, Employment Tribunals (England and Wales); President, Appeal Tribunals (England, Wales and Scotland); Senior Circuit Judges |
136,500 |
|
6.1 |
Circuit Judges; Sheriffs; County Court Judges (Northern Ireland) |
126,400 |
|
6.21 |
Chairmen, VAT and Duties Tribunals; Deputy Senior District Judge (Magistrates' Courts) |
119,000 |
|
7 |
Chairmen, Employment Tribunals; District Judges; Immigration Judges |
101,400 |
|
1. This group receives a slightly lower percentage increase than other groups to continue the gradual repositioning of group 6.2 more centrally between groups 6.1 and 7. | ||
|
Table 6: Pay bands for chief executives in the NHS, 1.4.08 | ||||
|
Pay band |
Primary care trust, £pa |
Ambulance trust, £pa |
Strategic health authority, £pa |
Special health authority, salary range, £pa |
|
1 |
103,758 |
111,097 |
158,710 |
Group 3: 98,353 - 139,764 |
|
2 |
114,680 |
119,561 |
169,291 |
Group 2: 139,764 - 160,470 |
|
3 |
125,601 |
126,968 |
179,871 |
Group 1: 160,470 - 181,176 |
|
4 |
136,523 |
- |
- |
- |
|
5 |
147,445 |
- |
- |
- |
|
London |
- |
148,129 |
201,032 |
- |
|
Source: Department of Health. | ||||
|
Table 7: Defence medical services salaries, 1.4.081 | ||
|
Pay scale/spine (rank) |
Mininum salary, £pa |
Maximum salary, £pa |
|
Higher medical management (OF-6) |
127,407 |
134,154 |
|
Higher medical management (OF-5) |
113,449 |
125,542 |
|
Accredited consultants (OF-3 to OF-5) |
75,156 |
129,228 |
|
Accredited GMPs and GDPs (OF-3 to OF-5) |
94,839 |
120,570 |
|
Non-accredited medical officers (OF-3 to OF-5) |
62,819 |
94,593 |
|
Accredited medical and dental officers (OF-2) |
65,949 |
71,772 |
|
Non-accredited medical and dental officers (OF-2) |
52,225 |
58,164 |
|
Service medical and dental officers (pre-registration) (OF-1) |
39,534 |
- |
|
Medical and dental cadets |
14,301 (on appointment) |
17,881 (after two years) |
|
DEFENCE MEDICAL SERVICES DISTINCTION AWARDS | ||
|
A+ |
£59,576 |
- |
|
A |
£39,719 |
- |
|
B |
£15,888 |
- |
|
DEFENCE MEDICAL SERVICES NATIONAL CLINICAL EXCELLENCE AWARDS | ||
|
Bronze |
£18,580 |
- |
|
Silver |
£29,232 |
- |
|
Gold |
£40,362 |
- |
|
Platinum |
£57,056 |
- |
|
1. Including X-factor. | ||
Additional resources on XpertHR
- Public sector pay review bodies (1): discontent rumbles on We examine the latest pay awards for the police, school teachers, the armed forces and the prison service.
- Public sector pay review bodies (2): the health professions In the second part of our feature on public sector pay review bodies, we look at the recommendations of the NHS Pay Review Body and the Review Body on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration.
