By KHRISNA VIRGIL

Tribune Staff Reporter

kvirgil@tribunemedia.net

STATE National Security Minister Keith Bell yesterday branded the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that mandates police officers be compensated for overtime pay a “hollow judgment”.

While Mr Bell would not comment on whether he supported the court’s ruling, he told The Tribune that officers were not entitled to overtime pay.

“In my view the judgment is a hollow one,” Mr Bell said, “ They didn’t get anything. The only award is cost which the government must pay if we don’t appeal. But that can be taken from the private engagement funds.

“This issue is not whether I support or not. They are not entitled to it.”

He said he was unsure of whether the government would seek to appeal the ruling. Mr Bell spoke to this newspaper from the British Virgin Islands where he is attending the Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference.

In his ruling this month, Justice Milton Evans said a Force Order issued by former Police Commissioner Paul Farquharson in 2003 was relevant to the matter, as it mandated that public officers be paid when they work for more than 40 hours in a normal 40-hour work week.

Although counsel for the government argued that the Order isn’t applicable because of its references to the Employment Act, which does not apply to police officers, Justice Evans determined that the salient point is that the Commissioner had clearly set out the terms applicable to “officers who work overtime”. 

On Wednesday attorney Wayne Munroe said the Police Staff Association was prepared to act on the Supreme Court ruling mandating police officers be compensated, adding that he was “puzzled” by the lack of official response.

Mr Munroe pointed out that the ruling gave Commissioner of Police Ellison Greenslade the opportunity to decide whether officers – who have worked 12-hour shifts within the last two years – were paid overtime or given time back.

However, Mr Munroe said the Police Staff Association has not received any communication from the police chief despite the fact that he was free to discuss the terms of compliance with the ruling with the Police Staff Association at his convenience.

Mr Munroe, legal counsel for the PSA, made his comments during an appearance on Guardian Talk Radio with Jeff Lloyd.

He said: “What is a bit disconcerting, puzzling and upsetting, is that you don’t have a sitting down with, even if it’s just the association, to say let’s work it out.

“Since the ruling, nothing. This is the sort of thing that you should be able to work out. I would do that because I’d want to reduce cost, I would want to keep police morale high. Hopefully that will still happen perhaps they are just looking at it to see if it [ruling] is legally sound.

“We are prepared to do what is necessary to make sure that the thing works as it’s supposed to work and we encourage the persons on the other side to do the same.”

He added: “Whether they pay (officers) or give time back is a matter for the Commissioner of Police. But if you don’t have sufficient officers that caused you to do a 12-hour shift anyway, how you gone let all these people take this time back?”

Earlier this week, State Minister for Legal Affairs Damian Gomez - acting Attorney General at the time - told The Tribune that the government has not yet determined whether it would appeal Justice Evans’ decision, saying officials are likely to discuss the way forward on the matter this week.