Civil Service Pay Must Change, Union Warns

Published: 19 February 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

Ministers have been urged to end civil service pay restraints, described as “barking mad” by union leaders. Mike Clancy, the general secretary of Prospect, warned that the government risks failing to recruit technical and digital specialists if current pay policies continue. He criticised the “rightwing trope” that restricts highly skilled civil servants’ salaries, arguing that such rules prevent government roles from competing with private sector opportunities. Clancy insisted that senior specialists in technical fields should realistically earn more than the prime minister to reflect their expertise.

This call comes as the prime minister’s chief secretary, Darren Jones, outlined plans to reform hiring, seeking more risk-takers and delivery-focused staff to create a faster, more effective civil service. Jones emphasised promoting “doers, not just talkers,” signalling a shift in recruitment criteria to reward tangible outcomes rather than rhetoric. Clancy welcomed the sentiment but insisted that retaining talent requires meaningful pay and career progression. He said that without addressing compensation, efforts to modernise the civil service would be significantly undermined.

According to Clancy, retention issues are most acute among technical specialists, whose skills are in high demand elsewhere. The union has repeatedly highlighted the imbalance between workload expectations and financial recognition, suggesting that civil service pay policies are outdated and counterproductive. Clancy described the historical practice of capping senior civil servant salaries at levels comparable to the prime minister as “all barking mad,” reflecting a lack of understanding of modern specialist roles. These policies, he argued, have led to a talent drain that affects government departments responsible for critical national functions.

In a detailed interview with the Guardian, Clancy also raised concerns about government deregulation policies, cautioning that insufficient attention to workforce resourcing risks undermining legal obligations under the Employment Rights Act. He noted that regulatory delays are often mistakenly attributed to bureaucratic rules rather than staffing shortages or lack of expertise. Evidence from multiple agencies illustrates this, with Natural England missing 1,316 planning application deadlines due to staff absences or insufficient specialist knowledge, representing 58% of unmet targets. Similarly, the Environment Agency cited low resourcing as the primary factor behind 75% of missed deadlines, highlighting systemic workforce challenges.

Clancy argued that if the government is serious about modernising the civil service, it cannot separate this goal from fair pay. Without competitive compensation, he said, senior specialists will continue to leave for the private sector, weakening delivery capabilities. He urged ministers to discard outdated assumptions about civil service salaries and to implement a clear, energetic pay and reward agenda that reflects the value of high-level expertise. According to Clancy, reforming pay structures is not merely symbolic but crucial to achieving the government’s broader operational objectives.

The union leader emphasised that many highly skilled employees in departments like the Ministry of Defence, the Hydrographic Office, and the Met Office face stagnating wages that fail to recognise the complexity and importance of their work. Clancy described this situation as “careless” and warned that the clock is ticking for meaningful intervention. He insisted that reforming pay is as important as adjusting recruitment criteria, arguing that without financial recognition, even the most motivated staff may be unable to sustain high performance levels.

Clancy also addressed deregulation, cautioning ministers against oversimplifying the issue by framing delays in infrastructure, housing, or nuclear projects solely as regulatory obstacles. He insisted that resourcing remains the key driver behind missed deadlines, and regulators are often builders rather than blockers. He suggested that government rhetoric about sweeping deregulation risks misunderstanding the practical challenges faced by departments tasked with delivering complex projects, and could create further inefficiencies.

The union leader criticised ministers for appearing to capitulate to pressure from business groups seeking looser regulation. He said that evidence-based evaluation should guide policy changes rather than populist or politically motivated speeches. “Gather the evidence, have the conversation, make the change,” Clancy said. “But don’t make stump speeches promising deregulation because it aligns with political narratives. That approach risks undermining productivity and public trust.”

Clancy drew on his experience as the TUC’s lead on the Employment Rights Act, expressing concern that business lobbying may weaken crucial labour protections. He noted that while the act marks a shift back towards employee rights, there is a risk of dilution during implementation. Measures such as limiting zero-hours contracts and clarifying worker status are pivotal for creating fairer employment standards but remain vulnerable to delay. Clancy emphasised that these changes represent a fundamental transformation in the labour market, challenging previously entrenched practices of employer authority.

“The Employment Rights Act signals that individual rights matter and that growth must not rely on precarious employment,” Clancy explained. He highlighted the tension between employers’ expectations and emerging regulatory standards, underscoring the need for clear government communication. Clancy called on ministers to demonstrate confidence in enforcing these reforms while maintaining constructive dialogue with business leaders. He argued that a transparent, principled approach will reinforce both fairness and productivity in the labour market.

Clancy concluded by reiterating the interlinked challenges of civil service reform and labour law implementation. He stressed that effective government delivery relies on recognising and rewarding talent appropriately while maintaining robust regulatory standards. Ignoring these factors, he warned, could compromise public service performance and hinder the government’s strategic objectives. By aligning pay policies with the demands of modern specialist roles, the UK could strengthen its civil service and support sustainable economic growth.

In summary, the union leader’s intervention highlights critical weaknesses in current civil service pay structures and staffing policies. He insisted that without a realistic pay framework, attracting and retaining technical expertise will remain difficult, undermining broader reform efforts. Clancy also cautioned against superficial deregulation rhetoric, advocating for evidence-based decision-making and adequate resourcing to ensure effective service delivery. His warnings underscore the urgent need for government action to modernise pay, strengthen retention, and support a capable, agile civil service that meets national priorities.

By addressing both compensation and workforce planning, ministers could enhance operational efficiency and ensure that highly skilled civil servants are motivated, retained, and able to deliver on complex projects. Clancy’s statements suggest that current pay limitations are not merely inconvenient but risk structural inefficiencies in critical government functions. Policymakers are therefore faced with a choice: maintain outdated constraints or adapt to meet the evolving demands of the 21st-century civil service.

Check our latest news