Misguided view over pensions

With reference to "Police get good deal over their pensions" (Starmail, July 21), I felt, as a serving police officer, that the author Mr Desmond Quine needed a few points clarifying in what can be best described as a misguided attack on the employment rights and contract conditions of officers.

He suggests that our pension scheme is an arrangement shrouded in mystery and so rich in reward that it compels chief officers to withhold details of it.

I am not a police chief but I have 21 years' service with the West Midlands Police and for the past 10 years I have been a junior manager in that organisation. I am happy to be detailed about our pay and conditions as they currently stand.

Mr Quine is correct in his conclusion that our current pension scheme is rewarding. He is also correct to state an officer joining the service at 20 is able to retire on a full pension when he or she reaches 50. This is not a clandestine arrangement. It is a basic employment right.

Mr Quine is sceptical that a fiscal analysis of our pension scheme would not be provided by police chiefs.

An individual's finances, pension arrangements and employment details are a private matter, but I have no hesitation in providing such details. At the current rate of pension deduction from my salary, I will pay £126,000 into the police pension scheme.

I am due to retire in 2016 (aged 51) and as a uniformed inspector, I will receive a commutation (tax-free) of £120,000 and a monthly pension of £1,700 (taxable). In the current economic climate this is not excessive.

Glen Robson, Wolverhampton