Sunday 23 February 2014

Post Sentence Assessment - The Verdict

Here's some of the best comments from yesterday on West Yorkshire's award-winning flagship innovation 'Post Sentence Assessment'

"As Chief Executive of the DTV Probation Trust, Russell [Bruce] is charged with running a business". There's the rub. Nowt about working with clients. Its about a profitable business model with people as widgets to be processed in as cost-effective means as possible. Won't be long before we have the introduction of Japanese industrial 'just-in-time' techniques, CRC sponsorship by Toyota in Derbyshire? By Nissan in the Teesside? By Honda in Wiltshire? Court to Induction to Activity to Completion.

Efficient use of public funds is not criminal, but using that as a means to effect de-humanisation of the client group is. Informing people about ways in which they can improve their lives and behaviour and reduce the impact upon others is invaluable, but it will not be achieved by simply processing groups of 'assets'.

My caseload is not a collection of credit notes waiting to be cashed in. It is primarily a collection of variously damaged, disenfranchised, disturbed and dysfunctional men and women who have never been listened to, never been shown any respect, never had more than ten minutes with another person without being abused physically, emotionally, or verbally. The fact that they self-medicate with (variously and/or collectively) adrenalin, alcohol, opiates, amphetamine, benzodiazepines, legal highs should not come as a surprise.

Most of them don't like me because I am part of the system. Many don't want to talk to me because they don't trust me. Some have been in our system for almost ten years (due to back-to-back Orders), others are just starting a lengthy relationship, and yet others are taking what will be their first and only glancing blow with our service. This in addition to those with lifetime requirements of contact.


This is the joy of my caseload, and my professional experience is richer as a result. I am not an accountant. I am not an administrator. I am not a production operative. I am a Probation Officer. As of very soon I will no longer be employed as such. I am sad, I am angry and I fear for the impact upon everyone.

**********************
I'm friendly with a PSO who now works in West Yorkshire. She says that Post Sentence Assessment is used by some practitioners to good effect (especially where other agencies are involved but this requires good knowledge of local resources) and in principle it was a good idea. She says it is a mess though because the expectation is that most offenders do a group to cover their days. The groups are untested, they invite 20 or so to the first group (this is 20 people who may not have been seen for many weeks or even months because of waiting lists so are not motivated) in the hope that some might turn up, and the groups complete with only a small handful still attending. As a result most finish their orders without attending many times and without any meaningful intervention as staff are told not to see people while they are waiting for groups, and the orders are very difficult to breach. Word has quickly got out that people just need to be a bit difficult - eg have GP appointments, sick notes for depression, or claim that if they don't attend JobCetre they will get sanctioned - to avoid groups, appointments and breach.

***********************
Of course, all the evidence suggests 1-1 - face to face working/therapeutic relationships are the most helpful and productive means by which to encourage, achieve and sustain change.................which is why all these tin pot projects are doomed, Capt Mainwaring!

They rely heavily on group work, and whilst I have always been a supporter of group work, it has always been as an add on, not the be all and end all. This way of working, lacks any need to build relationships or to get inside the head and lives of clients, because 'someone else delivers it and it's a template, it has no soul'. It could be delivered by a volunteer, a private company, an 'old lag' a charity, or other organisation....of which we know very little - about their motivation, their ethical base or in some causes their legitimacy. The 'OM' - PO or PSO becomes an administrator, nothing else. Just as with the introduction of conducting key milestones in the lives of prisoners, by video links, phone conferences and through 3rd parties, bollocks, all of it.

I was always excited by the term end to end management, i.e. you wrote the report, and saw out whatever the court imposed, offering continuity and knowledge and hopefully, the trust which began to emerge at the Report stage. Also, because it trumpets the relationships we form with people, it supports the idea that a single person, appropriately trained and qualified, yes those dirty words, can have a significant, neigh humongous impact on a client. TR, like PSA and similar plots, dispense with this in favour of sound bites, without any substance. TR is doing a fine job, assisted by Trusts who say nothing, in transforming our clients into commodities........and the results will be disastrous for clients and painful for those of us, who continue to try to derail TR, but whose voices are largely ignored.


*****************************
I'm prepared to accept that there are a range of motivations for bringing in approaches like PSA. Among these, though probably unspoken, will be the possibility for earning reputation, and money. Along with this I think there is a genuine desire to improve the standard of practice of some staff (and maybe rein in those who went native some time ago) - but this very quickly slipped into standardisation and levelling down skills, not enabling practitioners. In my trust the roll-out of SEEDS came with desistance fanfares and dewy-eyed treatises about the importance of individual skill, but the counter-revolutionary tanks of "you do this work with everyone, all the time, or you'll answer to us" have now rolled in. Any good intentions have just fattened up the goose for the privatisation Christmas.

****************************
Your all making the assumption that 'Activity Requirement' = accredited programme ! Oh no it doesn't . . .it means x no.of days of "meaningful activity". . this can be any old shite delivered by absolutely anyone, it is the model for CRC. Please don't get me started on 'Action For Change' !. . . non - accredited piffle delivered to any size groups where s.u.'s (yes I'm brainwashed) can all have different offences; be of different ages; different sex and be serving a community sentence or be on Licence. Get this, the content can be made up as you go along . . .would you believe a trip to the local theatre was deemed a days 'meaningfull activity' . . I kid you not.

******************************
Current programmes open to and offered by probation services are not under question as they stand. They're delivered and foucused on effecting change to offending behaviour and helping to change lives for the better. The concern being raised is when the private sector have responsibility and access to these tools, where the focus changes from changing lives and assisting people, to profit margins and shareholder dividends.

Probation is no longer going to be a service, it's an industry. The private sector will take everything they can and gear it towards profit. That is it's primary focus. Social values, public safety, clients development will all come a very distant second to happy shareholders.


**********************
This is utter bloody madness. Staff are overheads and clients are collateral, the bottom line ie profit is king. Let's hear it for the Tories and Lib Dems!!!

85 comments:

  1. Grayling was at the BBC and maybe experienced a successful TQM exercise which was used at the BBC using the DRIVER approach:

    * define the project
    * review the business baseline
    * identify opportunities
    * verify opportunities
    * evaluate & plan implementation
    * review and report

    The review highlighted that many of the ways of doing business had simply grown up and turned into traditions... The opportunities to improve were clear. Reduced staffing, modified work practices and a general focus by managers on the bottom line... it was recognised that for these changes to have any durability or long lasting impact upon the business it was vitally important that everyone in the business understood the part they had to play in turning it around... this approach was suggested as a template for application in the public sector.

    What is missed out above, and what Grayling etc have also missed out, are the fundamentals of what TQM is. It is NOT a top-down imposition at a rate of knots for the sake of political expediency, it is an inclusive, collaborative process that requires careful design and implementation.

    Grayling's approach is as close to deep fried sushi as you could possibly get. No subtlety, no finesse, no style - cover it in batter, fry it within an inch of its life in a vat of rancid oil and wrap it in an old newspaper.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to Wikipedia:-

      Total quality management (TQM) consists of organization-wide efforts to install and make permanent a climate in which an organization continuously improves its ability to deliver high-quality products and services to customers. While there is no widely agreed-upon approach, TQM efforts typically draw heavily on the previously-developed tools and techniques of quality control. TQM enjoyed widespread attention during the late 1980s and early 1990s before being overshadowed by ISO 9000, Lean manufacturing, and Six Sigma.

      In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the developed countries of North America and Western Europe suffered economically in the face of stiff competition from Japan's ability to produce high-quality goods at competitive cost. For the first time since the start of the Industrial Revolution, the United Kingdom became a net importer of finished goods. The United States undertook its own soul-searching, expressed most pointedly in the television broadcast of If Japan Can... Why Can't We? Firms began reexamining the techniques of quality control invented over the past 50 years and how those techniques had been so successfully employed by the Japanese. It was in the midst of this economic turmoil that TQM took root.

      The exact origin of the term "total quality management" is uncertain.[1] It is almost certainly inspired by Armand V. Feigenbaum's multi-edition book Total Quality Control (OCLC 299383303) and Kaoru Ishikawa's What Is Total Quality Control? The Japanese Way (OCLC 11467749). It may have been first coined in the United Kingdom by the Department of Trade and Industry during its 1983 "National Quality Campaign". Or it may have been first coined in the United States by the Naval Air Systems Command to describe its quality-improvement efforts in 1985.

      Delete
    2. Also from wikipedia:

      "Sushi is a Japanese food consisting of cooked vinegared rice combined with other ingredients, usually raw fish or other seafood." : )

      Delete
    3. Isn't wikipedia wonderful?

      "The Grayling is a species of freshwater fish in the salmon family of order Salmoniformes. It is the type species of its genus."

      Delete
  2. Apparently grayling has instructed or 'imposed' on probation trusts an 8 week 'practice' of TR operating procedures from 1st April 2014. I'm sure a strategy of non co operation could be devised by someone in the know in probation. Apparently the stuff sent out by MOJ/NOMS is laughable, compromises public safety, duplicated processes, hinders joined up communication and working and undermines service users involvement etc etc. NAPO should insist that this 'practice run' should follow the TR operating procedures to the letter, immediate spilt working, transfer of cases between NPs and CRC, admin split, use of new forms etc. if probation staff/trusts try to mitigate the obvious flaws in TR operating model then it's not a real and valid practice, and is a pointless exercise, unless cynically grayling is not bothered about the 8 week ' practice period' it's just so he can say that he has done it. Use this blog, napo blog, tweeter and Facebook to highlight and shame any trust which is seeking to tinker with the practice period to make it look good ( WHISTLE BLOW SO EVERYONE CAN HEAR IN THE PRESS). When the going gets tough, the tough get going - grayling not playing by Queens-bury rules so fight fire with fire.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Please click on the link below to confirm your email address.
      Then your FOI request to Ministry of Justice will be sent."

      It really is that simple.

      Delete
    2. Keista22 is absolutely right, apart from calling this "non co-operation" - we need to be following the procedures to the letter and exposing this dangerous nonsense. Any attempt to ameliorate the problems will only create more chaos down the line. Stick exactly to what you're supposed to do. It will be difficult, and go against our natural inclination to make things work, but in the long run interests of staff and clients will not be served by collaboration. We need to show the MoJ that they have to go back to whatever beer mat they wrote these plans on, and think again. Delay, delay, delay!

      Delete
    3. Non-cooperation, lmao. Managers will be seeking to make this work and expecting good will from staff on both sides of the divide.

      Delete
    4. Forgot to add to my last post 17:54 I think probation will be sponsored by Polyfiller come 01.04.14 as a load of probation staff will be filling the cracks in this crap called TR.

      Delete
    5. They can expect what they like. It doesn't mean they'll get it.

      And whilst you can polish a turd (Mythbusters proved it), a polished turd is still a turd.

      Delete
    6. Get your marketing right and you can sell it at a premium - civet cat coffee

      Delete
  3. Here is that link for Freedom of Information requests:-

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/

    ReplyDelete
  4. I feel a bit thick for asking this, but as TR rumbles on I seem to be getting more confused daily. But...
    If a CRC think an offender should be breached, they hand the file to the NPS to effect breach proceedures, (is that right)?
    But does the person in the NPS who receives the file and request for breach have to act automatically on that request or do they have the autonomoy to return the paperwork to the CRC with 'no action taken' because they feel breach is unwarrented at this stage?
    Sorry if thats a stupid question.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I noticed with interest in my Trusts recent TR newsletter (propaganda sheet) that an Enforcement Officer role will exist....perhaps that is the key to this ?).

      Delete
    2. I though CRCs were staffed by probation SPO, PO and PSO staff. If they send a breach to NPS, and if I've read blog correctly, CRC staff will be just as experienced, competent and able to decide on breaches. If that is overturned by NPS staff that its not warranted at this point. on what grounds would the decision be made, would NPS staff seek to interview the service user themselves because they question the judgement of the CRC staff. I can see that causing a massive amount of professional friction and duplication of effort. NPS STAFF would need to provide evidence/ information to CRC staff, which I guess would put the nose out of CRC staff. I could imagine that any opportunity that a CRC member of staff get to have one back on NPS staff would follow... Very very divisive, what an absolutely mad situation. At moment probation serves the public well, is joined up, and effective. Being replaced by systems aimed at serving share holders, us divisive, fragmented and untested. Whistle blowers get ready, journalists get ready, there is going to be plenty of negative stuff coming from probation. I hope no matters which leads to a child(ren) or person(s) being seriously hurt or killed due to this idiotic TR. experiment occurs.

      Delete
    3. 'If a warning has already been issued in the previous twelve months the CRC must refer the matter to an NPS enforcement Officer to determine whether court action should be brought.

      In such cases, the CRC will need to prepare all pre-breach paperwork, and the NPS will review the case and discuss with the CRC as necessary. where the NPS judges court action is appropriate, it will provide to the court the information necessary to commence enforcement proceedings...'

      http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/rehab-prog/competition/target-operating-model.pdf

      Delete
  5. Does this mean that Grayling and the rest of them will have to shut up about those being released from custody with only £47 in their pockets?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10655903/.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anyone convicted of a crime will be required to pay a charge of up to £600 under Government plans to force offenders to contribute towards the cost of running the country’s courts.
      Convicted criminals will be forced to pay the levy, even if they plead guilty to the offence, the Justice Secretary will announce this week.
      Chris Grayling hopes the proposals will raise up to £80 million per year to cover a portion of the cost of running criminal trials in England and Wales.
      Currently, offenders are not charged for the cost of administering their case when they are convicted of a crime.
      In some cases, judges can require criminals to pay fines, and compensation to victims, as well as to make a contribution towards the costs of the prosecution lawyers in the case.

      However, measures contained in the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, to be debated for the first time in the Commons on Monday, will see all adult criminals required to pay towards the cost of actually operating the criminal courts service.
      The exact levels of the charge will be set out by the Justice Secretary once the Bill becomes law.
      Officials suggested that an offender who pleads guilty at a magistrates’ court for a shoplifting case could incur a charge of £190. By contrast, a more serious offender, who is sent for trial for robbery at a Crown Court, for example, could be charged up to £600 when convicted, under the plan.
      Mr Grayling said the reforms demonstrated that the coalition was determined to make sure crime does not pay, unlike the last Labour government.
      “Under Labour it seemed that the message was ‘crime does pay’”, Mr Grayling said.
      “Sadly all too often on Labour’s watch it seemed like criminals could just get away with it, leaving communities blighted and a trail of victims in their wake.
      “We’re turning that message on its head. Now it’s the criminal who’ll have to face the consequences of their crime - including the financial ones.
      “I think the hard-working law-abiding public would expect that anyone found guilty of a criminal offence should have to put their hands in their pockets and contribute towards the costs of the system.”
      The charge will be imposed on all criminals as soon as they are convicted but it will not be collected until other financial penalties – such as compensation for victims – have been paid.
      For criminals who refuse to pay, enforcement officers will be able to deduct payments directly from their earnings, which could include taking money from state benefits, under the plan.
      Offenders who are jailed will not pay the fine until after they have been released.
      The measure forms part of Mr Grayling’s effort to make convicted criminals pay to
      help their victims recover. Criminals’ fines are being used increasingly to fund services for victims and witnesses, through schemes such as the victims’ surcharge, an additional charge added to other court fines, which raised £10.5 million last year.
      Under the Bill, the Justice Secretary would review the new criminal courts charge after three years.
      The charge would also be levied on offenders when they lose an appeal against their conviction or sentence.
      The Bar Council, which represents barristers in England and Wales, is said to support the new charge on the grounds that criminals who fail to admit guilt and force a full trial should pay the price.
      However, civil rights campaigners have warned that many offenders will be unable to pay, and that a punitive charging scheme operating in this way would threaten to compromise the historic presumption of innocence.
      The New Economics Foundation think-tank suggested that collecting court charges would be difficult, with an estimated £600 million in fines already outstanding.

      Delete
    2. I've had a thought! Let the CRCs pay the £600 on behalf of their clients then they can claim the TR payments, and prove their system works....

      Delete
    3. No doubt the same companies bidding for TR will get the contracts to collect the £600 court fees?
      Is there a monopoly issue araising in the criminal justice system that needs looking at?

      Delete
    4. I'm confused - what's the CPS costs application in each case for, if not for the costs of administering the case? Or do they mean on top of that as well, to pay for the Courts Service?

      The core mistake at all of this nonsense is Grayling's failure to understand that justice is an outcome, not a process. You don't 'do justice' to someone, you punish and rehabilitate them, and then justice is restored. What the Tories are trying to so is make people forget that we're all users of the criminal justice system, because we all have a stake in the outcome. It's not just people who commit offences who are the 'users' of the courts, we all are. And therefore we should all be paying for it.

      Delete
  6. Ah, the 8 week practice...this may be the bit removed from the justice.co.uk website's timeline....I think March and April will be impossible, most people still do not know what their job entails...and what if the whole 'practice run' is a pile of shite?...What then? Another delay? Maybe there is a plan B?

    My take on DRIVER

    Driver - TOM
    Deluded
    Reactionary
    Inoperative
    Venal
    Extortionate
    Rhetoric

    Driver - Good Probation Practice style
    Decisive
    Responsible
    Innovative
    Veracious
    Exemplary
    Rewarding

    Let's not participate in false accounting, but do, as Keista 22 suggests, and respond to TR operating procedures to the letter.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Over the last few decades managerialism has become rampant in both private and public sector. Probation has been drowning in acroynms. All vain attempts to impose technocratic solutions to bestow kudos on snake oilers and carpetbaggers. All probation work needs to be effective is to adhere to its own Hippocratic Oath of Advise, Assist and Befriend. These words are not soft and meaningless. They do not ignore reoffending, ignore risk to others, nor do they not exclude home truths being expressed. What they do is start with the individual as person, not as a commodity.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As a PO who delivered TQM in a previous working life, Crosby Quality to be precise, I find the idea of applying this to probation laughable. It just demonstrates how little insight Grayling and his minions have into the world of probation. TQM works on the principle of removing all defects from the process so in manufacturing businesses there is no wastage in the end product.
    The very essence of what we do in probation is to work with damaged people be it through education, birth circumstances, economic deprivation, relationships, mental health....the list goes on and on. Can I suggest to Grayling that in order to capture the benefit of TQM he addresses THOSE issues first? Now that would be a revolution!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. sorry, meant evolution ! I must keep up with Grayling's management speak...

    ReplyDelete
  10. If, as I indicated in earlier posts, Post Sentence Assessment / Generic Activity Requirements are the future in all CRC / NPS areas then we may have to enlist the help of the Judiciary and the Magistrates. I can tell you from direct experience that Magistrates in West Yorks loathe the practise. Whereas they used to take pride and show interest in sentencing an offender to a specific activity / programme, they are now pretty much left to pronounce rather sheepishly (cos they don't really understand it) . . . "we are not sending you to custody today, instead we are giving you a 12 month Community Order with a 30 day Activity Requirement" . . .look of confusion all round as if to say "is that it ?". Because that kind of generic sentencing lacks any detail, magistrates are now latching on to the fact that all CO's have to contain a punitive element and before long the 'punitive' sanction will have more credence than the 'rehabilitative' element.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can also tell you from direct experience of the courts that some influential judges are refusing to sentence PSA.

      Delete
    2. At the moment sentencers in West Yorks can use Supervision and Programme requirements instead of PSA Activity requirements, and often choose to do so. But what happens when these disappear under the new Act? The only alternative will be custody.

      True, this new Activity model is unpopular, but nobody has to follow the way WY is doing it. PSA is not the same as an Activity Requirement, it's just one way of working an Activity Requirement. I'm sure other Trusts (sorry CRC contractors) will make a better job of it and devise something better than PSA to use in their areas.

      But, what happens when each CRC are operating different practices and models? The NPS will be working to a different model again, so any cases being passed between CRC and NPS will be very confused, and each CRC will be working differently to each other, so any sideways transfers again will get confused. I really don't get this CRC/ NPS split - it makes no sense, at all. Are NPS supposed to devise their own version of PSA, and if so would this be national?

      PSA in West Yorkshire is a confused muddle. What will it be like when each area has it's own different muddle?

      Delete
    3. "But, what happens when each CRC are operating different practices and models?"

      My understanding is that CRC's are encouraged to innovate - so much for National Standards - the original justification for their introduction - along with The Sentencing Council - or whatever the body was then called - was because of some rather glaring examples of divergent sentences and probation practices in different parts of England and Wales, that had some considerable publicity.

      In fact, at the time - there seemed divergent practices even in neighbouring courts and probation teams within the same petty session and probation areas!

      Of course - the way probation was - the basic conditions were very straightforward and open to each individual officer to interpret as seemed best for each individual client.

      If a court had particular concerns or wanted to ensure specific action was taken, appropriate conditions could be added but the core of probation - abolished in 1992 - was that the court made an agreement with the probationer - who gave a verbal commitment in court, that for the time specified by the court of anything between Six months and three years that the supervisee should be of good behaviour, keep appointments with the probation officer and notify the officer of any change of address - in return the court would not pass any other sentence apart from imposing compensation or court costs.

      - that was it - worked superbly in many cases - a (technically) freely made contract directly between the criminal and the court - I sometimes would explain it that they have me thrown in to try to check that you keep to the agreement YOU (always stressing that) made with the magistrate or Judge AND on top if I can help you so you are less likely to break the law, I am keen to try, you need to tell me what would help - I can't guarantee I'll do what you want but I will hear what you say.

      All that went in 1992 - didn't work for all but it did for many - some felt they had been given a chance they had not deserved - which I always felt was a good starting point.

      Delete
  11. anon 11:54 not a stupid question at all but rather an accurate description of the procedure. Our area have had the briefing. CRC staff pass breach details to NPS. If NPS staff disagree with the breach they can make the ulitimate decision not to proceed with it. First of all this is insulting to CRC staff who don't forget are also qualified, experienced probation staff who are quite capable of making sound decisions. Secondly, I would like to see the brave member of NPS turning down a breach as they will be leaving themselves wide open come SFO investigation. This leads me to another point. NPS staff will shoulder the majority of the burden and responsibility for individuals who they will have no personal knowledge of. As we progressed through the briefing I think NPS staff were getting a little uneasy, shifting in seats and nervous coughs - the buck stops well and truly with NPS. So, lets get on to resettlement - CRC staff can still manage these cases but NPS will prepare all reports. When it comes to an oral hearing both NPS report author and CRC staff member will attend - fabulous idea. why send one officer when you can have two. Oh , sorry , I forgot NPS staff are the cream of the crop and of course CRC staff will need their expert guidance *twist of the head with attitude and pout*

    Lets just say anyone standing outside of the room during our briefing would think we had a top billing standup comedian on the team meeting agenda with the amount of laughter. Don't get me started on the RISK ESCALATION FORM. my god, what a joke.

    It really is quite scary to think of what 'they've' come up with. I can imagine 'them' all sitting in that there london, highfiving each other.Actually, I feel really embarrassed for whoever wrote these new procedures thinking they've done a good job. Aww, I'm sorry to tell you that you have completly fucked up. The fact that more than one of graylings minions will have got their heads together to come up with this shit is even worse.
    I TOTALLY AGREE with keista22 we should FOLLOW EVERYTHING TO THE LETTER.. ir CRC staff get rid of any high risk of harm cases and mappa cases. Prepare no more psr's. Follow the new breach procedures etc. I know myself and others in my team on both sides of the divide will be doing this. Why should we cover up the inherent flaws in the procedures?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for that information to my question at 11:54.
      It's eactly the things that you mention (in part) that made me ask it.
      I have a concern however that those in the CRCs may be put under pressure to 'off load' the less profitable and hard to manage individuals by the private companies they work for. It has been a common practice in all other government outsourced contracts.
      It would indeed be a brave PO who refused to breach, as you say any SFO and they'd have some explaining to do. But the private companies will be aware of that too and don't work to the ethical codes found in the public sector.
      The NPS may think themselves in Salem and part of the witch hunt if some of these issues are not addressed.

      Delete
    2. Good luck to CRC staff not doing anymore PSRs as there is a damn good reason why not job descriptions have been described for the staff that will be working in this shit. So Grayling can say that that it had been trialling well the new system (despite the fact that staff on both sides of the divide will be doing each other's work)

      Delete
  12. The profession of probation is dead, is there not some sort of legal challenge to be made; can the politicians simply put an en to all we have worked, studied and paid for for over 100 years? Has a profession ever been killed off in this way before. It may be difficult to argue this in the NPS but the CRC's are de-skilled totally. Can't we just put a class action in and give it a whirl?? Does anyone have any ideas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was thinking the same thing. Are we not effectively being made redundant as our roles as they are, are being taken away? There must be a case for constructive dismissal or similar. I have raised this with union reps but no response to date.

      My biggest concern about any legal action we might take is something I remember reading / hearing about employers, NAPO and others planning on having some kind of internal hearings instead of employment tribunals. I think it would be unwise to agree to this and I think we need to move swiftly and take joint action before this is set up and before shares are sold. Otherwise we will be seen as complicit in being deskilled.

      Delete
    2. Also, from what I have been reading up on it will be important for all POs sifted into CRC to put in a grievance about this change of role and responsibilities and constructive dismissal then when it comes to a tribunal, if our grievances are ignored the tribunal can take this into account and order additional compensation. I am going to give the union a set amount of time to respond and then begin making my own enquiries (although why should we be having to do this when part of a union is beyond me!).

      Delete
  13. Please can someone tell me what PO's in CRC's are for? I'm completely at a loss to identify any work for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous @15.55 - post "share sale" and the inevitable restructure there won't be any - work or CRC POs.

      Delete
    2. anon15:55 exactly! what on earth will PO's be doing in CRC's, I cannot see any role for them. They have been sold down the river. As anon15:04 says is there any chance for class action?Someone on twitter pointed out that The Ministry of Justice is planning to pay private companies to make them redundant. Bidders will, based on the data provided on current staffing levels on each CPA, include in their bids for Year 1 the number of redundancies they plan to make and the costs of these redundancies.

      Delete
    3. I third this. Any PO's who are in CRC's will be the first to go post sale. The fact is that you are not needed as you will only be doing a job that a 'cheaper' PSO can do. They in turn will be replaced by cheaper staff once the like of Sodexo etc get to grips with things. Mention was previously made of HMP Northumberland where, post sale, the first thing they did was lay off 200 of the 500+ staff; nearly half. Yeah, the prison is probably shit now but that is not and never has been the main driver behind the actions of private companies.

      Face it, we've all been shafted by both the MoJ and our own trusts.
      Now be a good sheep, get back to work tomorrow, do not question anything and just do as you are told.

      Oh, and enjoy your TR training...it's likely to be your last!

      Delete
    4. If this is the point that we recognise there is no role for POs in the CRCs ( as suggested above) are we being made redundant NOW? I think there is a real possibility we should be taking legal advice NOW. I suggest:
      1. all unionised colleagues write to their branch chairs requesting that they take legal advice on their position on this basis immediately.
      2. submit FOI requests asking for the CRC PO job description now. If it can't be produced it does not exist.
      3. There is a generous redundancy package available that THEY think is just for senior managers well really if we have in effect been made redundant NOW, let's have it for all the CRC POs whose roles have disappeared.

      Delete
    5. I agree completely. I for one will be doing this. In addition we need to be raising grievances as per our concerns and also, when asked to hand our cases over or anything else that is effectively making us redundant i.e. putting out names in 'allocation diaries' we need to be making it clear verbally and in writing each time that we feel this is taking away our roles and responsibilities and effectively making us redundant.

      Why are the unions not fighting this with us?

      Delete
    6. Back to Dan Shaw's File on 4 programme and we have a fairly clear picture from the non-answer by Phil Andrew (Working Links):

      Shaw - will you keep the probation staff in place, the experience that they bring?

      Andrew - the aim that we have is to pretty much take the organisation on as it is and then look at it over a period of a year or so. If we're bringing in probation in a particular region, into a national company, there are synergies to be had there, particularly from a back office perspective...

      Shaw - ... that means cutting staff doesn't it?

      Andrew - ... that means cutting costs, doing things more effectively...

      Shaw - ... which inevitably means fewer staff?

      Andrew - ... it may mean fewer staff, at the end of the day our focus is to make a social difference by reducing reoffending we create savings for the taxpayer and if we make a small return, and it will be a very small return on top of that, then that's entirely appropriate, but its not our primary objective.

      So there's a bidder with a clear one year shelf-life for probation staff.

      Richard Johnson (ex-Serco Welfare to Work) spoke of the "winner's curse", where the contract winner has offered to do the job at the lowest price, then has to cut corners to achieve results - and in working with offenders that will put the public at significant risk.

      The obvious corner to cut at this stage must surely be the expensive PO grade staff in the CRC?

      Delete
    7. Yeah, I agree. Griviences are the way forward and will be our succour as we pack up our desks!

      Listen, fuck them all! Do nothing at all. Put your feet up, relax, it won't hurt at all. I promise. Just one small stab of pain then you will feel all sleepy and can just forget the previous X numbers of years and the remainder of your carears.

      Cling to the hope that NAPO will come galloping over the hill like the cavalry in some John Wayne movie, down to your last bullets and bereft of hope.

      Let's be frank, most PO's know what the future holds and are astutue enough to know that there is little that can be done.

      Well, apart from my ticket dodging friend Ms H. Me and you will be fine, trust me :)

      Delete
  14. The cash-fest continues with the usual suspects-plus:

    No Offence! "Best practice in contracts and partnering for Transforming Rehabilitation" Conference, 19th March 2014, Number One Pride Place, Pride Park, Derby

    Conference Brief

    The government intentions are to contract out a significant part of current probation work addressing what the government believes to cover lower risk offenders. It is intended that the new providers will either be First Tier (Prime Contractors), Second Tier (Sub-Contractors) or Third Tier (providers commissioned by way of grant agreements). The delivery arrangements will be underpinned by a Payment by Results mechanism. This conference will provide those intending to bid for or deliver work through the Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) programme with a detailed understanding of the proposed procurement process and its key legal and contractual elements. This will include panel presentations by key organisations and stakeholders and interactive workshops looking at some of the detailed issues related to delivery of the TR work. The topics to be covered include the core elements of public services contracts ( including payment by results), collaboration through joint ventures, consortia or partnering, supply chain and sub-contracting arrangements, workforce issues,and opportunities for mutuals, social enterprises and charities.

    Delegates will have the benefit of both detailed practical and legal input via the conference sessions to help them to maximise their understanding of and their commercial interests in the TR programme.

    Speakers

    Mark Johnson & Owen Willcox
    Partner & Senior Associate, Geldards LLP

    Jerry Petherick
    Managing Director Custodial & Detention Services, G4S

    Yvonne Thomas
    Managing Director Justice, Interserve

    Nigel Bennett
    Director, PublicCo

    Joe Kuipers
    Chair, Avon & Somerset Probation Trust

    Workshops

    Steve Jenkins
    Partners, Geldards LLP

    Frank Curran
    Senior Associate, RedQuadrant

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frank Curran

      Frank was born in Glasgow and graduated from University of Edinburgh in 1986. Taking the advice of Dr Johnson a little too literally, he took the high road to England at the earliest opportunity and spent twelve years working with homelessness and mental health charities. Two years backpacking and working as a dive-master in Asia and the Pacific developed his appreciation of sharks and long, uncomfortable bus journeys. Reluctantly returning to London, he commissioned supported housing for a local authority before setting up as a consultant in 2002. Since then, he has worked across most parts of local government – and thus knows a bit about most things in the fields of housing, homelessness, housing support, adult social care, public health and community safety. This eclectic experience explains why Frank leads for RedQuadrant on adult social care, public health, and criminal justice. He retains a keen interest in travel and overseas opportunities for RedQuadrant (particularly in China), although this has been curtailed somewhat in the best possible way by the recent birth of his first son.

      Delete
    2. Nigel Bennet appears on this blog with some regularity...partner of competition manager as quoted previously , and why oh why is our old pal and proverbial "thorn in the side of TR" Joe Kuipers on the apologist circuit...Come on Joe, the body of the Trust is barely cooled!!!

      Delete
    3. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

      Delete
  15. And on, and on, and on they go, where they stop, nobody knows (but maybe when the money runs out?)

    Transforming Rehabilitation Workshops

    ACEVO, NCVO and Candour Collaborations have been awarded a grant from the Ministry of Justice to deliver a series of events to the VCSE sector to raise awareness and understanding of the Transforming Rehabilitation competition.

    The series of events will run throughout the competition at a number of locations across the country and will cover everything from general information to in-depth sessions on TUPE implications (full details below). These free events will be aimed at VCSE organisations wishing to participate in the competition and aim to present an honest view of the procurement process including the potential operational and commercial challenges.

    Most of the events will be held on a regional basis and attendance will not be restricted by the region your organisation is based in, please attend the event which is most convenient to you. However, the Networking events will be held at Contract Package Area (CPA) level so we would ask that you only attend these events in the areas that you are interested in delivering in. These events will provide a forum for the shortlisted prime contractors in each CPA to introduce themselves to the VCSE sector.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you considering being involved in Transforming Rehabilitation?

      Clinks

      You will probably have seen in recent Clinks communications that we have been awarded a Ministry of Justice grant to provide legal support to voluntary sector organisations wishing to engage in Transforming Rehabilitation (TR). This newsflash provides some more detail about the workshops we’re running across the country.
      Subcontracting – the legal implications for voluntary sector organisations

      These workshops will provide an overview of the new Industry Standard Partnering Agreement (ISPA) – the contract that Tier 1’s (Primes) will be required to use when subcontracting with their partners in TR. We will consider the implications of the contract, including risk and insurance, governance structures, TUPE and Pensions, HR implications, data protection etc, followed by a Q & A. Dates and locations -

      London, Friday 28th February
      9.30am registration | workshop 10.00am – 1.00pm

      Birmingham, Tuesday 11th March
      9.30am registration | workshop 10.00am – 1.00pm

      Exeter, Wednesday 12th March
      2.45pm registration | workshop 3.00pm – 6.00pm

      York, Thursday 13th March
      1:30pm registration: workshop 2.00pm – 5.00pm

      Manchester, Friday 14th March
      9.30pm registration | workshop 10.00am – 1.00pm

      Cardiff, Friday 14th March
      12.30pm registration | workshop 1.00pm – 4.00pm

      London, Friday 21st March
      9.30am registration: workshop 10.00am – 1.00pm

      Bookings - To find out more and book your place, visit the Clinks website today

      Delete
    2. Capita Conferences Announce Their Transforming Rehabilitation to Reduce Reoffending Conference – 28th February 2014 - Manchester

      Jan 25 2014, 2:10am CST | by PR.com
      The conference brings together probation, police, housing, health and the voluntary sector to help you discover effective cross-sector approaches to reduce reoffending.

      Manchester, United Kingdom, January 25, 2014 --(PR.com)-- Transforming Rehabilitation to Reduce Reoffending Conference

      Friday 28th February – Manchester

      Speakers Include:

      Sally Lewis, Chief Executive, Avon and Somerset Probation Trust and IOM Portfolio Lead, Probation Chief Association
      John Long, Deputy Chief Constable, Avon and Somerset Constabulary and IOM Lead, Association of Chief Police Officers
      Chair: Graham Beech, Strategic Development Director, Nacro
      Chris Jewesbury, Head of Health and Justice Commissioning (Yorkshire and Humber), NHS England

      Major reforms that plan to overhaul how offenders are managed and rehabilitated are gaining pace. Agencies must now prepare for the upcoming changes from April 2014 as competitive processes are introduced.

      The Transforming Rehabilitation programme emphasises the need to support the broader life management issues that often cause the cycle of reoffending amongst prolific offenders. Capita’s National Transforming Rehabilitation to Reduce Reoffending conference brings together probation, police, housing, health and the voluntary sector to help you discover effective cross-sector approaches to reduce reoffending.

      Attend this conference to take away insight and practical guidance on developing rehabilitation schemes in your area through partnership working to achieve lower crime rates, fewer victims and safer communities.

      More information:
      http://www.capitaconferences.co.uk/public-sector-conferences/police-criminal-justice/full-conference/article/transforming-rehabilitation-to-reduce-reoffending-conference.html?code=SMMK

      Delete
    3. Fancy filling your boots? Like the sound of your own voice? Enjoy telling others to do as you say, not as you do? Have you no shame? Then join our Scamfest Conference team.

      Please provide some Grade A bullshit about your career with potentially interesting qualities with which we can then make tenuous links to the relevance of our MoJ sponsored conference, for which you'll be handsomely paid and provided with hospitality like you wouldn't believe. We'll charge delegates shitloads of money and make a fortune. They'll offset the cost of their conference fees against tax allowances anyway, so nobody loses.

      Its Win-Win-Win all the way with Thieving:Rascals, the MoJ approved TR bollox-broker. Even we couldn't make it up.

      (Frank Zappa already came up with Trendmonger).

      Delete
    4. Ah, Gregory Peccary. That was a long time ago.

      Delete
  16. I'd heard the rumours but hadn't seem the minister's words until today.

    WRITTEN MINISTERIAL STATEMENT
    13 February 2014
    MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
    Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Jeremy Wright):

    I am today announcing the Government plans to commence reforms to the
    Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 on 10 March 2014. These reforms are important in supporting our wider agenda on transforming rehabilitation. We know that obtaining employment can be an important factor in reducing re-offending and these reforms will help more people who have shown that they have put their offending behaviour behind them to get back into productive work. The provisions will reduce the period of time during which some offenders may have to disclose their convictions to prospective employers (the rehabilitation period). I should emphasise,
    however, that public protection will not be compromised. It will remain the case that fuller disclosure of cautions and convictions will continue to apply to a range of sensitive occupations and activities. In addition, the most serious convictions will remain subject to disclosure for any job.
    The measures being commenced are contained in sections 139 and 141 and Schedule 25 to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. These reforms shorten the rehabilitation periods for most convictions, after which they are considered to be ‘spent’ and need no longer be disclosed for most purposes. The changes also extend the scope of the 1974 Act as it applies in England and Wales so that custodial sentences of up to, and including, 48 months may become spent.

    Previously the longest custodial sentence which could become spent was 30 months.The reforms will act retrospectively. These amendments to the 1974 Act apply in England and Wales only and impact on criminal conviction certificates, which show an individual’s unspent convictions.
    Section 112 of the Police Act 1997 governs the issue of these certificates and it is also being commenced in England and Wales on 10 March to ensure that accurate criminal convictions certificates are available reflecting the revised rehabilitation periods in this jurisdiction.
    The above reforms will also allow the Government to take steps to commence fully section 56 of the Data Protection Act 1998, the only provision in this Act not to be in force. Section 56 of the Data Protection Act 1998 will come into force shortly after the changes to the 1974 Act are commenced.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'It will remain the case that fuller disclosure of cautions and convictions will continue to apply to a range of sensitive occupations and activities'
      - but NOT THE CRCS! Take a look at the Target Operating Model and it's clear that, unlike in Probation now, CRC applicants will be covered by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act! Better still, with the changes announced to the act now being introduced an applicant will be legally entitled to conceal a conviction for an offence attracting a community order just 1 year after the order expires. Looks like Grayling wants to be certain that there's a wider pool of 'old lags' for the CRCs to call on, never mind the risk they could pose to vulnerable clients!

      Simon Garden

      Delete
  17. Chief Executive and Business Development Manager
    Organisation: Cumbria Reducing Offending Partnership Trust (CROPT)
    Paymant Details: £35,000 per annum pro rata
    Closing date for applications: 3 Mar 2014

    Founded in 2009, CROPT is a small charitable trust providing a range of largely volunteer-led support services for offenders and ex-offenders in Cumbria. In order to prepare for the implementation of Government’s ‘Transforming Rehabilitation’ agenda, CROPT is looking to appoint a Chief Executive and Business Development Manager who will provide overall organisational leadership and work with Trustees and staff to secure for the charity a robust future.

    Further details may be obtained from Helen Storey, CROPT Strategic Development Manager at helen.storey@cropt.org.uk

    Fixed Term for 3 years
    Flexible working hours will be considered

    Closing date for applications: 17.00 on Monday 3 March 2014
    Interviews of short-listed applicants: Wednesday 12 March and Friday 21 March 2014

    ReplyDelete
  18. NAPO has said in the past that neither NPS or CRC are safe. I think that is a lie. As far as I'm concerned NPS is safe job security wise. NAPO need to nip that lie in the bud.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What needs nipping in the bud is the trolling that seems to be going on tonight.

      Delete
    2. tim, i find it offensive that you think people are trolling tonight. I think people have got genuine concerns about what PO's will be doing in CRC's. I for one am wondering what the hell I will be doing in CRC. My area have had the briefing/training and that was the main concern raised by all CRC staff

      Delete
    3. I hate to draw an analogy, and people with be first to claim 'Godwins Law', however, this does remind me of the concentration camps, where people WANTED t believe that everything was going to be fine, where those 'in charge' assured them everything would be fine and all of the indicators said that everything would be fine, only to find that all packed possessions were not needed (mainly our skills and experience) and we willingly walked into the showers, blinded by the belief that our values were the same as others.

      Well folks, the doors are just about to be locked, the Zyklon B will be dropped in the TR training and those PO's still alive after this will be getting out heads caved in with boots and rifle butts.

      I for one will cherish my memories of the Probation SERVICE. It has been a service and it has been a pleasure to serve. As one Anon above quoted: 'Enjoy your training, it will be your last' :(

      Delete
    4. @Anon 20:28 There're genuine concerns (which I share), and then there are gloating comments like "As far as I'm concerned NPS is safe job security wise". I'm sorry if you're offended, but I call that trolling, and I'd prefer to see less of it.

      Delete
    5. 21:34 - A dark and chilling analagy, and I am struck by this from wikipedia again:-

      Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies is an assertion made by American attorney and author Mike Godwin in 1990 that has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches. In other words, Godwin said that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis.

      Delete
    6. 'What needs nipping in the bud' is people bleating the word 'trolling' every time they encounter an opinion at variance with theirs. I'm given to wonder how the clients of these people get on, denied a voice, with any difference of opinion dismissed as reflecting something malicious or personal. A concern that NAPO may have misrepresented the relative risks to job security in the NPS and the CRC respectively isn't 'gloating', it's a genuine anxiety.You may 'call that trolling' but that's irrelevant. Your Self-serving definition isn't the measure of what's at stake here.

      Delete
    7. "Bleating"; "self-serving" - I hope you show more respect to your colleagues in the office, Anon 23:58. That's all I'm asking for.

      Delete
    8. 'Respect...that's all I'm asking for'? You're 'asking for' 'Respect' by calling everyone with a different opinion to you a 'troll'?

      Delete
    9. Please guys - knock it on the head! Thanks.

      Delete
  19. Yes you are correct anon18:21 the NPS is safer than CRC but aren't both terms and conditions "protected" for 7 years. Its after that that the shit hits the fan. Unless we fight we are history; this is the start of a process to make money out of the vulnerable. Indeed one can argue if you don't fight you are colluding and many have colluded up to now. Lets hope that now we can see the "whites of their eyes" many more will be galvanised into action.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think many are confusing the 7 years terms and conditions protection and redundancy. yes , t's and c's are safe for 7 years but obviously that is only if you're in a job. According to documents sent to those in unison in my team it also highlights that there will be no redundancies for 6 months. Basically, after 6 months they can get rid of who they want - terms and conds mean jack all then.This happened in HMP Northumberland- please don't think that this isn't a real risk. It will be written into contracts regarding redundancies but I imagine this will be a common feature of any takeover bid with any company

      Delete
    2. That is correct. Protection of ts and cs is NOT protection against redundancy.

      Delete
  20. Frank Curran, probably an associate of Russell Webster blocked me on Twitter, a while back, when I queried his assertion that "probation mutuals can bid to be primes and a number have done so although mostly as partners in Joint Venrures(sic)"

    He is already working with Devon and Cornwall Probation Trusts(plural - sic) and seems very knowledgeable!

    http://www.redquadrant.com/our-services/criminal-justice/



    "Criminal justice - There is no area of the public sector facing greater change than criminal justice. Police and Crime Commissioners, Transforming Rehabilitation, Payment by results, big cuts to the Ministry of Justice’s and Police budgets: each one of these is big enough on its own, but together they amount to a revolution in how criminal justice services will be commissioned, delivered and judged in the future. Of course the sector does not exist in isolation; Welfare Reform - particularly the bedroom tax, single room rents and Universal Credit – will have a profound impact on offenders, as will changes to drug treatment. It’s daunting.

    There are ways through this to deliver better outcomes for offenders and the community. At RedQuadrant we have experts in both adult and juvenile justice arenas. As importantly, we have experts in local authority housing and care, and health. We can help local partners join up services in order to make sure that money and services are targeted as effectively as possible. We also know a lot about mutualisation and out-sourcing, and can help criminal justice agencies think about this approach as well. We’ve also worked overseas and can bring best international practice to bear too.

    Call Frank Curran on 07515 875381 or email frank.curran@redquadrant.com

    Frank Curran
    frank.curran@redquadrant.com

    Frank Curran, Senior Consultant, is our lead on criminal justice. Frank has worked with criminal justice agencies for many years and is currently leading our work with Dorset and Devon and Cornwall Probation Trusts (see below). Criminal justice needs to be considered as a part within a larger mechanism and Frank has a detailed understanding of the importance of links with housing, health, public health, social care and the wider community.


    We are currently working with Dorset and Devon and Cornwall Probation Trusts, via the Cabinet Office’s public sector mutualisation programme, to help them develop a mutual. This will be ready to compete and win business when the Transforming Rehabilitation competition gets underway. It’s a bit more complicated than that though. Not only are we helping them set up a mutual but we are helping them set up a joint venture with two major employment and housing providers to develop a much better service for offenders and the community. It’s complicated, but it’s exciting!


    We have worked with the Danish prison service to outline their plans for transformation, savings, and service improvements. They use a Positive Deviance approach to identify the real opportunities existing within the population for improved outcomes.

    We believe in conversations."


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love the idea of Positive Deviance.

      Delete
    2. Was it Frank Curran who gave the advice to Dorset, Devon & Cornwall senior managers to give The Shaw Trust all the information they needed to put together a bid as a prime, without getting any agreement to form a mutual in writing, enabling them to be dropped sharpish? If it was, I really wouldn't bother going to that conference.

      Delete
  21. see anon at 19:36 I will certainly be following this up first thing.

    ReplyDelete
  22. As a bidder in the midst of this competition I have heard a great deal of positioning of relatively inexperienced bidders who are out of their depth and relying on the CRCs business as usual models to get them through the first couple of years before they can make their changes. As a mutual bidder I have a very good insight into what works and know what staff do well now and what not so well. I know what bureaucracies are in the current models which can be removed. The potential for innovation is greater in any of the mutual operations than in any of the bigger players purely because we already know the business. I have agreed with many of the thoughts and sentiments expressed in this blog as I too have many years in and feel my profession has been eroded. My response to being attacked is to build not fight for what is largely lost. I know that will anger many people but both responses are equally needed.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Amutualbidder, I'd be careful if I were you,many in the Work Programme failed early on and if you have signed up with one of the big fellas they will protect their profits before you can say" diversity or equal ops".

    ReplyDelete
  24. you are right anon and there are more ways to make savings than getting in bed with big players.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Having worked with various companies when the work programme was first rolled out I know a bit about the way it works in the private sector regarding government contracts.
      It's not a case that many failed early on, they were simply starved and abused by the big players. It was made so impossible to operate, you either closed up leaving a vacancy in the market for the big boys to step into, or you were absorbed in full by the big boys into their operation and did things there way.
      For example:- CRCs will require need to use for some clients a drug support agency. That agency will be paid x amount per person refered.
      But once the private companies are familiar with the processes they'll employ a couple of drug workers on a shite rate of pay to deal with those needing referal. It leaves the drug agency little option but to shut down through lack of referals or ( as the big boys are now holding all the cards) amalgamate and become an extention of the prime company.
      So please be careful. I respect your opinion and your decisions but I can't express enough how shockingly cut throat, unethical and disturbing this type of outsourcing really is.
      Being familiar with good working practices and having an ethical and social concience, I would arguee, makes you even more vulnerable.

      Delete
  25. Amutualbidder it is very clear you and others in the mutuals not only have a great deal of knowledge....you have ALL the knowledge!
    That has been built up over many years and , like the de mutualised building societies , is it fair to gain profit now from the efforts of so many before us?
    The multinationals like Sodexho and GEO have seperate bidding without their mutual's involved - will they be using the mutuals experience for that approach?? of course, they have have become so good at taking without paying.
    You are of course right to think that the game is lost for the Trust and that to build on the mutual is a way forward...BUT you have to smarten your acts up considerably...I have heard some of the USP's of the mutual stable and to be frank they won't cut the mustard.....The comments on this blog suggest a small number of multinationals will take control, if you are to succeed you must consider greater mutual alliances to gain the economies of scale , but you cannot do that , that's because the competition is fixed in favour of the big boys. If the govt were committed to mutuals, CIC they would make the competition compatible with such a position. I am sorry to say , aside from maybe one mutual , the game is lost - if you are the one Amutualbidder, Well Done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On the subject of Mutual alliances . . .at our last area staff conference, W. Yorks were informed that we were joining forces with Northumbria (i think!) to make a bid for the CRC's. We had a pre -recorded audio - visual presentation from their CEO (or similar) extolling the virtues of both areas and how we would make a fine team. Clearly discussions were well down the line; time, effort, resources and finance must have have been utilised. It was a rallying call to get the troops on board and get behind this TR thing that was going to happen whether we liked it or not.
      Then, almost as quickly as it was announced, it was no more ! No real explanation, just that it was no longer happening. Once again I ask why ? What did Northumbria know that W. Yorks didn't, or vice - versa. Did someone at the lofty heights of management get a call on the bat - phone . . .something along the lines of "it was all going so well for you untill you fell into bed with the wrong people !". Someone out there knows the answer . Come on people blow the whistle. No CEO works in isolation, they all send letters / e- mails, they all have personal secretaries. Tell us who communicates directly with MOJ. Senior management do not committ time and effort to a project and then pull it at the last minute unless someone else is pulling the strings.

      Delete
    2. Small top senior management team of 3 from northumbria trust meeting senior executives from sedexo this week at a location unknown. This meeting not made public yet. Apparently sedexo senior executives have already been taken by senior managers from Northumbria to meet service user council a few weeks ago. I'm lead to believe the SUC reps were not impressed by what sedexo had to say. Need a good investigative journalist to get stuck into this TR and the behind closed doors deals being done to the detriment of probation staff especially in CRCs

      Delete
  26. Bye heck - lots of conferences on offer! I think I will be too busy tho!

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think some of your "Clients" may be having a giggle reading all this...

    ReplyDelete
  28. I think pretty much anyone not directly affected, or who doesn't think they're directly affected, will be rofl-ing. The giggling will stop when the reality of this TR omnishambles hits home with clients and communities alike.

    More recalls, linked and protracted benefit sanctions, no access to a supervising officer, back to court for no clear reason, serious further offences, deaths, huge debts for court appearances and/or jail fees, increased criminal activity to compensate, increased numbers who feel excluded, entrenched criminal 'underclass' - with territorial gang warfare developing as people protect themselves - ghettoisation of families already socially isolated on 'benefit street', a call for arming the police as violence increases (water cannon, firearms), CRC and NPS in meltdown as they (1) publicly blame each other over case decisions & (2) haemorrhage staff from the gaping wound that is the TR omnishambles.

    Having a giggle? Having a laugh? Not for long.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Oh really?

    http://twtrland.com/skills/Probation

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Must be some mistake - no mention of this blog!

      Delete
  30. But a probate lawyer from South Carolina makes the cut!

    ReplyDelete