Share.

7 Comments

  1. It is a laughable circumvention of the intention of the scheme, but the scheme is itself ludicrous. Why should anyone’s pension reduce because they worked longer?

    It’s an omnifarce.

  2. Quis_Custodiet on

    Power to her tbh. I can’t see that there’s anything objectionable on her end if she’s still fit to fulfil her role.

  3. concretepigeon on

    They should make her go through a full and open hiring process. If I have to go through a full application to go from a temporary entry role to the exact same job but permanent in the public sector, I don’t see why it should be any different for her if she wants to quit.

  4. Bubbly_Leave2550 on

    > During the one-day break, Deputy Chief Constable Nigel Harrison will step into her role, the Local Democracy Reporting Service said.

    Fuck that. I don’t want to know about who will replace her for the day. I want to know what SHE will do? Saga cruise from Bangor to Aber maybe?

  5. >It is important to emphasise that this will come at no cost to the taxpayer

    How can they claim this? If supposedly the retire+rehire scheme is in place to protect her pension, which fundamentally comes from the taxpayer, how does this not cost the taxpayer anything? If she doesn’t take part in this scheme and continues to work for the next 5 years, then her pension pot will go down, saving the taxpayer money, although at the expense of paying her to work. Or are these pensions not considered to come out of taxation?

    I’m sure there’s *something* I’m missing with this, and it’s probably also tied into why the need for this scheme exists in the first place.

  6. > A police chief constable on a £170,000-a-year salary

    For reference, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has an official salary of £172,153