The government has been urged to initiate a public inquiry or external review into the actions of the Police Federation of England & Wales (PFEW) after a tribunal found it fell short of its obligations towards officers involved in police pension claims.

Greater Manchester Police constable, Lee Broadbent, called on the Home Secretary to commission an investigation into the tribunal’s findings and the PFEW’s “failure to implement” reforms recommended by the Normington review.

The tribunal found that, following the McCloud judgment that ruled that younger public sector pension scheme members being moved to a less beneficial pension scheme was age discrimination, the PFEW had fallen short of its obligations towards members.

The East London Employment tribunal stated that the PFEW did not provide members with a “rounded understanding” of the likely outcomes, and provided a narrative that emphasised unlikely outcomes with the objective of protecting the transitional provisions.

It also found PFEW understood there was a “possibility” of age discrimination from the outset, its messaging was “unfailingly supportive” of the transitional provisions, there was no consultation of the membership at large, and consideration was not given as to whether there were less discriminatory ways of redesigning the scheme to be fairer to younger officers.

The PFEW represents over 100,000 police officers and negotiates with the government on pay and working conditions on behalf of officers.

Broadbent is being represented by law firm Leigh Day and its employment partner, Kiran Daurka, who is acting on behalf of around 10,000 clients to obtain compensation from the PFEW for injury to feelings and the reimbursement of legal fees paid by those involved in police pension claims.

The claims against PFEW were won last year, with compensation to be decided by the Employment Tribunal later this year.

“In the absence of a trade union, police officers need a highly effective representative organisation to be their safeguard and voice to government and senior officers,” said Broadbent.

“Many officers, like me, are concerned that PFEW does not offer such representation and the recent tribunal judgment supports this view.

“The judgment and subsequent actions of the PFEW are, in my view, in breach of some or all of the duties that parliament imposed on it.

“I therefore ask all police officers to support my calls for a public inquiry or externally led review of the PFEW and petition the Home Secretary accordingly.”

Daurka added: “Following the excoriating verdict of the employment tribunal we support our client's calls for an independent inquiry into the PFEW.

“The judgment was an overwhelming victory for almost 10,000 police officers for whom we had brought a pensions challenge and is a damning indictment of the conduct of the PFEW over many years.

“Our client believes the organisation needs to be fully investigated and held to account for its conduct and we ask the Home Secretary to respond to his concerns and hold an inquiry.”

A PFEW spokesperson commented: "When the tribunal ruling was made in June 2023, the National Board accepted the judgment, apologised to the members affected and committed to professionalising the PFEW. This started with the appointment of a professional as chief executive officer, leading a programme of change within the organisation.

"Since then, we have started a major transformation programme and appointed new legal partner. Further, PFEW has comissioned an independent review, which aims to learn lessons from this case and instigate changes aimed to improve the federation’s structure, processes and governance.

"We are engaging constructively with the claimants’ legal representatives to arrive at a resolution while also ensuring that the federation has a sustainable financial future for our more than 145,000 rank and file members.

"We acknowledge the continued support of our members and are committed to rebuilding a federation fit for the future."

---