Ex-SRP, 69, seeks pension, gratuity benefits

SUBMISSIONS were made in the Appeal Court on September 6 on behalf of an ex-Special Reserve Policeman (SRP), which stemmed from his refusal over 20 years ago to be absorbed into the Public Service as a regular policeman, but at a demoted level.

The court heard that the 69-year-old appellant, Winston Charles, was terminated at 46. He was an SRP sergeant when, in 2000, the State decided to absorb full-time SRPs as regular police.

Had Charles accepted the officer, he would have become a constable, a lower rank.

However, Charles regarded the offer as unfair and did not accept it. He is seeking pension and gratuity benefits.

Had he been absorbed, he would have worked until he was 55.

The case against the Attorney General was heard virtually at Tower D, Waterfront Judicial Centre in Port of Spain.

The case was heard before justices Mira Dean-Armorer (president), Carla Brown-Antoine and Malcolm Holdip.

Charles's attorney, Winston Thompson, referred to a High Court dismissal over a claim for constitutional relief, contending that Charles's rights under section 4(b) and (d) of the Constitution and his terms and conditions of employment had been breached.

Thompson said regular police officers are granted a pension and gratuity for their service, but not SRPs.

He submitted that SRP service is also public service, but does not equate to pensionable service.

Thompson acknowledged that the State made an offer in 2000 for the SRPs to be absorbed or accept a separation package.

Charles declined both offers, saying they were unfair.

The attorney cited cases involving two SRPs who were previously absorbed as regular police, and who retained their ranks.

The case was reserved to a date to be fixed.