§ Mr. Mark Carlisleasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what percentage of senior probation officers on promotion to that grade are paid less than probation officers on the main grade scale;
(2) what would be the cost in cash and percentage terms of restoring the pay lead of 20.86 per cent. for senior probation officers recommended by the Butterworth committee in 1972;
(3) what would be the cost in cash and percentage terms of providing for the lowest grade of the senior probation officers' scale to be equated with the top of the main grade scale.
§ Mr. MellorIn April 1983, the latest date for which information is available, senior probation officers who on promotion were paid less than main grade probation 587W officers on the maximum point of their scale (the only point which exceeds the minimum of the senior probation officers' scale) comprised between 4 and 10 per cent. of all senior probation officers. The Home Office does not have the detailed information required to enable a more precise estimate to be made.
The Butterworth committee did not recommend any specific percentage differential between the maxima of the pay scales of main grade and senior probation officers. What the Committee suggested was links between certain points on the scales on which local authority workers were paid in 1972 and the maxima of the scales for main grade and senior probation officers. The higher link happened to be 120.86 per cent. of the lower in 1972; the Committee recognised that the relationship might well change over time. Increasing the pay of senior probation officers on the top point of the scale so as to restore the 1972 differential would cost £478,500 in 1983–84, representing 0.62 per cent. of the pay bill.
Increasing the lowest point of the senior probation officers' scale to the top point of the main grade scale would cost about £20,000 in 1983–84 representing 0.0003 per cent. of the pay bill.