The policy was supposed to encourage career development by allowing officers to port over their benefits but i think the results may be the exact opposite.Maybe in the past, there were officers who did not perform well but managed to join another public agency for higher pay. However such officers are normally put on probabtion and if they do no perform well, they may not be confirmed. However, officers usually move for pay or career progreesion, so if an officer moves for a higher job but at the same pay, it will be bad for the morale of the officer. Furthermore, good performing officers are not motivated to move because they can progress in their own agencies, but when there is a vacancy, you will have difficulties filling it because officers are motivated to make lateral moves only and yet risk a low pb because the pb will be pro rated and yet the experienced hire will be too new in new agency to impress bosses to geta good performance grade. Almost certainly, the officer who moves will be worse off in annual compensation for the first year after the move.