.svg)
ÙA storm of controversy has engulfed the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) following the revelation that its chief executive, Mukund Krishna, received a remuneration package exceeding £700,000 for two consecutive years. The sheer scale of the payout has triggered a fierce debate regarding value for money, corporate governance, and whether the spotlight on Mr. Krishna—the first non-police professional and person of colour to hold the top administrative role—is driven by genuine financial concern or an unease with the Federation’s shift away from its traditional rank-and-file leadership.
While rank-and-file officers struggle with the cost of living, often resorting to food banks, Mr. Krishna was paid a total of £1.4 million over 2024 and 2025. This figure includes a base salary of £342,000, a massive 100 per cent "retention bonus," and substantial pension contributions. The revelation has prompted questions from members and the public alike: Is this standard practice, or is Mr. Krishna an outlier?
The Corporate Turnaround Specialist
The question of whether "every chief executive" of the Federation received such benefits can be answered definitively: No, because Mr. Krishna is unique in the organisation's history. Unlike previous leaders who were serving police officers elected to the role of Chair or General Secretary on police pay scales, Mr. Krishna was recruited specifically as a corporate "turnaround" expert.
Born in India and relocating to the UK in 2007, Mr. Krishna is a career management consultant rather than a police officer. His journey to the top of the PFEW began in the private sector, where he specialised in working with 'C-suite' executives on business recovery and digital transformation across the US, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Before taking the helm at the Federation, he served as its Chief Operating Officer, originally brought in to professionalise an organisation that had been heavily criticised by the 2014 Normington Review for its financial opacity and lack of modern governance.
His supporters argue that his salary must be viewed through the lens of the corporate crisis he was hired to solve. The Federation was facing financial catastrophe following a disastrous legal battle regarding pension changes. Mr. Krishna’s leadership team claims that by settling these group action claims, he reduced the Federation's potential liabilities from a crippling £110 million to £40 million. The "retention payment" that doubled his salary was, according to the Federation, a performance-related reward for saving the organisation over £70 million and averting bankruptcy.
A Clash of Cultures
However, the optics of a corporate consultant earning thirty times the salary of a starting constable have created a bitter divide. For decades, the Federation was led by officers who understood the visceral reality of policing the streets. Mr. Krishna represents a new era of "corporate policing," where leadership is defined by balance sheets and legal risk management rather than operational experience.
This friction is palpable in the reaction from the membership. Police officer Lee Broadbent, who led the pension action against the Federation, dismissed the narrative that Mr. Krishna’s negotiating skills warranted such a bonus. He described the pay package as "grotesque," arguing that the liability was reduced simply because members agreed to a lower settlement to prevent the Federation—and their own representation—from collapsing.
The controversy is further fuelled by the method of disclosure. The salary details were only released following a protracted Freedom of Information battle initiated by a Chief Inspector from Greater Manchester Police, dragging the Federation’s transparency into question once again. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp described the sum as "staggeringly large," urging members to question the appropriateness of such expenditure.
The Price of Modernisation
Ultimately, the Mukund Krishna saga highlights a painful transition for British policing institutions. As they attempt to modernise and adopt private-sector efficiency, they risk alienating the very workforce they exist to represent. While Mr. Krishna’s background as a global consultant and his heritage mark a significant diversification in police leadership, the conversation remains dominated by the stark financial inequality between the Federation's boardroom and the beat.
Whether Mr. Krishna is viewed as a financial saviour who earned every penny of his retention bonus, or a symbol of a staff association that has lost touch with its roots, depends on whether one values corporate solvency over solidarity. What remains clear is that the era of the Police Federation being run solely by "coppers for coppers" has been replaced by a high-stakes corporate model, with a price tag to match.
Mukund Krishna explains PFEW finances
This video features Mukund Krishna personally addressing the Police Federation's financial position and the rationale behind recent decisions, providing direct insight into his communication style and the "turnaround" narrative mentioned in the article.
