This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/7347633.stm

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Police pay battle goes to court Smith 'wrong' on police pay cut
(about 6 hours later)
A legal challenge to the government's decision not to back-date a police pay rise is to begin at the High Court. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith was wrong to "shave off" three months' worth of the police pay rise to comply with a "Treasury dictat", lawyers have argued.
The judicial review application has been brought by the Police Federation, which represents officers up to the rank of chief inspector. Police Federation QC Gavin Millar at the High Court challenged the government's decision not to back-date their 2.5% pay rise to September.
The decision not to back-date the pay rise sparked fury amongst police in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The "morale-hitting" move sparked fury and a huge protest march among police in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The government claims that staging the increase is essential for the country's economic stability. The government said staging the increase was essential for the economy.
The review application is also being backed by more senior officers. Pay packet hole
Lawyers for the police will argue at the judicial review that ministers breached a deal. Mr Millar said the move would cause officers to lose an average of £200 from the start of the police pay year in September.
Far more important was "the impact on the morale and confidence of the police over the statutory procedures for determining their pay", he told judges Lord Justice Keene and Mr Justice Treacy.
He said the Home Secretary approached the question of police pay "with a closed mind".
And she failed to recognise the "special and unique position" of the police and the restrictions on their freedom of action, including the right to strike for better pay.
The police say that a 2.5% pay rise was agreed, but that not back-dating it to the beginning of the police's financial year in September makes it worth just 1.9% annually.The police say that a 2.5% pay rise was agreed, but that not back-dating it to the beginning of the police's financial year in September makes it worth just 1.9% annually.
Ministers, however, claim that staging the increase is essential for economic stability, and that since 1997 constables have had an overall rise of 10% above inflation. Economy argument
Both Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and Prime Minister Gordon Brown have argued the award is appropriate and is in line with inflation targets - in particular, it is within the government's 2% public sector pay limit. Ministers, however, say staggering that increase is needed for economic stability, and that since 1997 constables have had an overall rise of 10% above inflation.
Both Ms Smith and Prime Minister Gordon Brown have argued the award is appropriate and is in line with inflation targets - in particular, it is within the government's 2% public sector pay limit.
Home office lawyers argue Ms Smith did not have a closed mind in looking at the issue, the government repeatedly made its position clear and acted within its powers.
The situation is in contrast to that in Scotland, where officers have received the back-dated pay rise in full.The situation is in contrast to that in Scotland, where officers have received the back-dated pay rise in full.
Thousands of police officers from across the country organised a protest march in London in January over the issue.Thousands of police officers from across the country organised a protest march in London in January over the issue.
The hearing at the High Court in London is expected to last two days. The hearing is expected to last two days.