Police protests

Complaints about pay and pensions were common in the police, though there were perks unavailable in most working class jobs. The Metropolitan Police, and others, provided free medical care. There were also uniforms which meant that a man did not have to pay for his own work clothes. Pay was often below that of semi-skilled working class men, though it was regular and secure; it was not affected by market fluctuations. Yet police officers felt hard done by. They had to contribute to their pensions, and they noted that men in the armed forces did not. Policing was deemed to be a respectable profession, equivalent to that of a semi-skilled or skilled worker. Yet other workers could depend on the additional input of a working wife’s pay for boosting the family budget; a policeman’s wife was generally forbidden from taking employment in case it gave her or her husband an opportunity for using undue influence. There were strikes in several major forces, notably Hull and Manchester.

In 1848, a small group of Metropolitan officers petitioned for higher pay; some went on strike in 1872 and 1890. The last of these strikes or ‘mutinies’, occurring shortly before the Police Act of that year, appeared particularly alarming. The activists of 1890 held meetings in working men’s clubs and in the offices of the Marxist Social Democratic Federation (SDF). They were rumoured to be talking with the leaders of trades unions too. The strike led to several nights of disorder in and around Bow Street.

There were other strikes in 1918 and 1919. Pay was an important factor behind these strikes as men had seen the war wear away at their wages. The Desborough Committee, set up between the strikes, made recommendations on pay and pensions. Pay was increased to match that of a skilled worker. The committee’s recommendations did not alter the legislation of 1890, but the Police Pensions Act of 1921 adopted its proposal that a man should receive half pay as a pension after 25 years’ service and two-thirds after 30 years.