Government wins in pay dispute with police union

The government has won a long-running pay dispute with the police union, which says they will be watching nervously to see how many leave the force after this decision.

The parties could not agree on a pay deal after about a year of talks, so an independent arbitrator - employment law specialist Vicki Campbell - was brought in to decide which of the final offers would be adopted.

On Monday, the arbitrator was in favour of the government's offer, which includes a $1500 lump sum payment, a flat $5000 pay increase for officers, plus another 4 percent increase in July and again in 2025.

There will also be a 5.25 percent increase in allowances backdated to last November.

Police Association members rejected a similar offer in April, saying it was nowhere enough and staff would leave in droves.

In an email to members seen by RNZ, the Police Association said it was disappointed.

"A recurrent theme in the arbitrator's decision is a need for Police to adhere to the government's fiscal constraints, and that appears to be have been a key determinant behind this outcome," it said.

Police Association President Chris Cahill told Checkpoint the arbitrator had to choose one side only in their decision.

"It's a very difficult process ... she was unable to mix and match or meet in the middle, so it's a high stakes game of win or lose."

The rules of the process mean it can no longer be challenged, and they now must abide by that decision.

Here's a breakdown of what the offer will include:

• $1500 lump sum payment
• $5000 general wage increase and 5.25 percent increase in allowances from 1 November 2023
• 4 percent general wage increase and corresponding increases to allowances from 1July 2024
• 4 percent general wage increase and corresponding increases to allowances from 1 July 2025
• Paid overtime, where applicable, at one and a half times from 1 July 2025

Responding to criticism from members after https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/521384/police-officers-furious-at-union-backdown-in-pay-dispute the union pulled back its offer] in a bid to reach a settlement in July, Cahill said there were some misunderstandings..

"The reality is after arbitration both sides have the opportunity to alter their positions, we've done this in the past and it's necessary once you know all the facts, you've seen the evidence from both sides, you've listened to the expert evidence ... we felt we had to move to give us the opportunity to win.

"It's unfortunate we haven't, but in some ways that highlights the need that we had to reduce our position."

Cahill said the two key lessons from this process was to ensure any negotiations in the future did not drag on, and to address the discrepancies between police and other public sector roles in time taken to reach the top of the pay band.

He did not believe the final offer addressed the increasing demand on police officers as well as the extra complexity and dangers they were faced with.

RNZ has also seen an email from Police Commissioner Andrew Coster, who acknowledged the process was long and drawn out, and had left staff feeling frustrated and disappointed.

"While this may not be the decision that staff were hoping for, the independent arbitration process has found that the offer was fair," he said.

Lack of backpay labelled 'disingenuous'

A police officer, who RNZ has agreed not to name, said the outcome was "gutting".

He had voted in favour of the government's final offer before arbitration began - not because he agreed it was enough, but because he was frustrated by the lengthy process.

After other professions like nurses and teachers had seen decent pay bumps, the officer said he was surprised the arbitrator's decision did not go the union's way.

The biggest issue with the government's offer was the lack of backpay, which he labelled "disingenuous".

The union wanted any increases backpaid to 1 July 2023, when the collective agreement began.

"A lot of the feeling across everyone I've spoken to was if it had have been backdated to the first of July, that government offer potentially would have been passed," he said.

"I think that was what prompted a lot of people to say, well, no, I'm not voting yes for this on principle."

It was not members' fault the negotiations had taken so long, and the government provided "piss-weak excuses" about the delay, he said.

But he was not sure officers would leave their jobs en masse - even if they wanted to.

"Those cops might feel like that, but the harsh reality might be, what do you go to? Most of us have mortgages, and people that depend on our salaries, so if we leave, then what?," he said.

"I think a lot will be disenfranchised, and pretty despondent with the job, and especially with Andrew Coster."

But he was concerned police would struggle to recruit more officers as a result of the outcome.

Cahill also said he did not believe there would be a mass exodus but police might lose a "good number of very valuable officers".

"I mean Australia is a very viable option. There is without a doubt significant pay rises there and anecdotally a lot of people were waiting to see the outcome of this. So we'll be watching to certainly watching nervously to see how many go."

Former NZ police officer says 'better financial rewards' to work in Australia

Australian police has been running a campaign to poach New Zealand officers since last year.

Meanwhile, Police Minister Mark Mitchell said police were pleased that final offer arbitration had ended and that officers "have certainty moving forward".

"We recognise that this has a been a long process for them," he said.

"We are very pleased that for the first time our police officers will be moving into a paid overtime framework."

Is it okay for police to have two jobs?

Monday's ruling follows reports last week that a police newsletter was sent out offering advice on how police officers could manage getting secondary employment.

Cahill said there were a number of officers employed in two jobs but he did not know the full number, because some were doing it without formal approval.

"Anyone that's working secondary should seek approval to do it, but we know that a lot of officers have to work that secondary work given the pressures we're under with the cost of living ... and this [final offer] will help to some way but it won't go all the way given the high inflation they've suffered in recent years."'

RNZ visual journalist Angus Dreaver asked people if it is acceptable for cops to work extra jobs to get by.